Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Stocksbridge Gas Bill,

Waterford Harbour Bill,

Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.

Huddersfield Corporation Gas Bill [Lords],

Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Stockton-on-Tees Corporation Bill [Lords],—(King's Consent signified)

Bill read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Cannock Urban District Council Bill,

As amended, considered.

Ordered,
That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed.

Walsall Corporation Bill,

As amended, considered.

Ordered,
That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means,]

Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed.

Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation (Rates) Bill [Lords]

Read a second time, and committed.

Ordered,
That Standing Order 211 be suspended, and that the Committee on Unopposed Bills have leave to consider the Bill on Thursday."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

Tramways Provisional Orders Bill [Lords]

Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Clyde Navigation Order Confirmation Bill,
To confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to the Clyde Navigation," presented by Mr. MUNRO; read the first time; to be read a second time upon Tuesday, 12th August, and to be printed. [Bill 163.]

Oral Answers to Questions — RAILWAY MATERIALS IN WAR AREA.

Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAY: 2.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the Government policy regarding the disposal of the permanent-way materials used by the British Expeditionary Force?

The DEPUTY-MINISTER of MUNITIONS (Mr. Kellaway): I have been asked to answer this question. The policy of the Disposal Board is that surplus permanent-way railway material in France and Belgium should, in so far as it is suitable, be disposed of so as to meet first the requirements of British railways and of home consumers and the requirements of railways in India and the Colonies. The balance will be disposed of, wherever possible, on the spot, either to the French and Belgian Governments or to private purchasers.

Oral Answers to Questions — CLOTH PRICES.

Mr. EVELYN CECIL: 4.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can see his way more fully to control or regulate the price of cloth as sold by the manufacturers, so as to enable not only large dealers in cloth goods to benefit by the control price but also smaller ones?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE(Sir Auckland Geddes): The right hon. Member appears to be under some misapprehension. There is no Government control of cloth. The issue price of wool is the same to all manufacturers.

Oral Answers to Questions — LACE (FRENCH IMPORT DUTIES).

Mr. ATKEY: 5.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on the 8th July, 1919, a French presidential decree imposed additional duties, varying from 40 per cent. to 260 per cent. on the importation of lace and new into that country and that these duties are very adversely affecting the export trade of Nottingham to France; that similar goods of French manufacture are specially exempted from the prohibition into this
country and are admitted free of all duty and in unlimited quantities; that every lace machine in Calais is fully employed whilst 70 per cent. of the machines in Nottingham and district are standing for want of orders; and will he consider the possibility of paying our Allies the compliment of following their own lead and imposing exactly similar duties?

Sir A. GEDDES: I am aware that the French import duty on machine-made lacehas recently been increased by 40 per cent., and on nets by 100 per cent. Under the reciprocal agreement of August, 1917, between this country and France, import licences were freely granted in each country for lace manufactured in the other. As to the condition of the Calais lace industry I have no information; but the Nottingham lace industry has certainly been suffering a depression and a good deal of machinery has been standing idle. My latest information is that the demand for certain classes of Nottingham products is improving. With regard to the hon. Member's suggestion I am not yet prepared to make a statement about future trade policy.

Mr. ATKEY: Do I understand that the reciprocal arrangement referred to having taken place in August has been varied by the French authorities?

Sir A. GEDDES: No. The arrangement has not been varied. Certain prices may have changed but not the duties.

Oral Answers to Questions — RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION.

INTERAVAILABILITY FACILITIES.

Mr. ATKEY: 6.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to a resolution passed at a meeting of the council of the Nottingham Chamber of Commerce on 30th June, which stated that, in the opinion of this council, the withdrawal, without notice, of the inter availability facilities hitherto available on the Midland and Great Central Railways between Nottingham and London is causing great inconvenience and loss of time to manufacturers and traders; and whether he will intervene in order to secure the renewal of these permits as they expire?

Sir A. GEDDES: I have received a copy of the resolution referred to and am in communication with the Railway Executive Committee on the matter.

TRUCKS (PRIORITY).

Mr. INSKIP: 7.
asked how many railway trucks are in use on an average on any given day for the purpose of carrying motor vehicles to or from the Cippenham depot; and whether there are more urgent demands for railway trucks at the ports than any in connection with the Cippenham depot?

Sir A. GEDDES: The figures are being worked out, and I hope to be in a position at an early date to send my hon. Friend the information he desires.

Mr. INSKIP: 8.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether there is any system in use by which different classes of railway traffic receive allocations of trucks in priority to each other according to their importance, respectively; whether the demands of Government Departments for trucks are subjected to any scrutiny or control by him; and whether the demands of Government Departments are in practice granted irrespective of the nature of their traffic and of the requirements of port or other public authorities?

Sir A. GEDDES: It is the practice of the railway companies in allocating trucks to give foodstuffs and perishable traffic first priority, coal for industrial and domestic purposes second priority, and to have regard to the nature and importance of other traffic offered to them for conveyance and to the desirability of sharing the available wagon stock fairly amongst all traders. The demands of Government Departments for trucks are subject to scrutiny and control, and trucks are not allocated to them without regard to the requirements of other traders.

Mr. INSKIP: Does the right hon. Gentleman give equal consideration to all classes of traffic according to capacity?

Sir A. GEDDES: Certainly. Equal consideration is given to all classes of traffic in accordance with the priority which I have indicated.

MIDLAND STATION, NOTTINGHAM.

Mr. ATKEY: 10.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the inspecting officer has yet visited the Midland Railway station at Nottingham; if not, when he will do so; and whether, if this visit cannot take place within the next seven days and in view of the great inconvenience being suffered by the travelling
public, will the report of a Member of this House who is in no way connected with Nottingham be accepted by the Board of Trade as satisfactory evidence of the state of affairs existing and of the necessity for immediate action being taken?

Sir A. GEDDES: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The chief inspecting officer of railways will visit the station as soon as his more important duties permit. I have seen no evidence of widespread inconvenience arising from the closing of the entrance referred to, and do not propose to adopt the suggestion in the last part of the question.

Mr. ATKEY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some thousands of business men and girls who have used this entrance, which is now closed, when travelling to and from their business at dinnertime, lose from five minutes to a quarter-of-an-hour through not being able to use this entrance?

Sir A. GEDDES: I am not in a position to agree or disagree with the hon. Member's figure, but the other entrance to the station is open.

Mr. ATKEY: If I submit evidence to my right hon. Friend will be give it immediate consideration?

Sir A. GEDDES: Yes. I have been giving this matter consideration for some time, as my hon. Friend knows, and am sending my inspector down to see the exact positon on the spot, but any information which the hon. Member gives me will be considered.

Mr. ATKEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman give me the approximate date when an inspector is likely to go down to Nottingham? I will put the question down in a week's time.

GOODWOOD RACES.

Mr. GILBERT: 12.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any special trains were run by the railway companies for the Goodwood races last week; and, if so, how many trains were supplies and what fares were charged the passengers?

Sir A. GEDDES: I am making inquiries, and will let the hon. Gentleman know the result.

Oral Answers to Questions — EGYPT (MILNER COMMISSION).

Captain ORMSBY-GORE: 21.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can announce the names of the members of the Milner Commission to Egypt, and its terms of reference?

Lieut.-Colonel Sir H. GREENWOOD: (Department of Oversea Trade) Invitations to join the Mission have been issued, but the whole of the replies have not yet been received.

Captain ORMSBY-GORE: Will the hon. Gentleman make a statement before the House rises, giving the names and terms of reference?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: If the names are received the Leader of the House will be able to make a statement.

Captain W. BENN: When will the Mission start?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: I am not able to answer that statement.

Oral Answers to Questions — MONTENEGRO.

Mr. McNEILL: 22.
asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Report of Count do Salis on conditions in Montenegro has yet been received; and whether he will lay the Report upon the Table of the House?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative, and the second part does not, therefore, arise.

Oral Answers to Questions — RIVER POLLUTION.

23. Lieut.-Colonel M. WILSON: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether under the Agriculture and Fisheries (Councils, etc.) Bill, 1919, powers would be obtained to enable the Board to deal with cases of river pollution which had an adverse effect on fresh-water fish?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Arthur Boscawen): No, Sir. The Bill does not confer on the Board any new powers in the direction mentioned by my hon. Friend.

Lieut.-Colonel WILSON: May I ask whether the hon. Gentleman does not
think that such powers should be conferred, and whether he would accept favourable Amendments which would give the Board such powers?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN: I think it may be necessary to afford such powers. I am not quite certain that they would be conferred better upon the Board of Agriculture or upon the Board of Trade, but in any case, they would not really be germane to this particular Bill.

Oral Answers to Questions — REQUISITIONED LAND (STATE FARMING).

Captain R. TERRELL: 24.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture how much agricultural land taken over during the War the State is still farming on its own account; whether any statistics would be furnished as to the working of this land; and what was the future policy of the Department with respect to it?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN: I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a detailed reply to my hon. Friend's question.

The following is the reply referred to

The acreage of land which the Board have taken possession, and are still in possession under Regulation 2 m of the Defence of the Realm Regulations is 52,180 acres, and of this an area of 31,198 acres is being farmed by agricultural executive committees on the Board's behalf, the remainder being let to farming tenants. Accounts of receipts and expenditure are rendered to the Board at stated intervals. They cannot yet be published in detail, but a statement will shortly be presented to the House giving the total expenditure and receipts in relation to the farming of these lands. As regards the last part of the question the policy of the Department, speaking broadly, is to withdraw from possession of lands that the executive committees are themselves cultivating, as soon as they are satisfied that other adequate arrangements can be made for their cultivation. Where the land is suitable for land settlement purposes, the Board hope that the county councils will consider the desirability of acquiring it. Where it is Considered expedient to continue in possession after the War has terminated, negotiations will be opened with the owner for a tenancy of the land for the
maximum period permitted by the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1916—that is to say, for two years after the termination of the War, or, with the consent of the Railway and Canal Commissioners, for a further period of three years.

Oral Answers to Questions — HAY AND FEEDING-STUFFS.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir J. HOPE: 25.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether it had yet been decided that the price of hay and of feeding-stuffs for next year was to be controlled?

The MINISTER of FOOD (Mr. G. Roberts): I have been asked to reply. The advisability of controlling the price of hay is now under the consideration of the Government. Arrangements have been made with the manufacturers of home-produced cakes and meals for these commodities to be available to farmers at fixed prices ex mill. Negotiations are proceeding with importers of foreign cakes and meals for the purpose of securing the importation of the largest possible supply at the lowest possible price. I will continue to control the price of millers' offals and of maize.

Sir J. HOPE: Can the right hon. Gentleman state when the decision will be arrived at, as the question of controlling the price of hay is pressing, and the uncertainty is very detrimental to agriculture?

Mr. ROBERTS: I recognise the uncertainty and how prejudicial it is, and, therefore, will do my best to expedite a decision.

Sir J. HOPE: Can the right hon. Gentleman give the date?

Mr. ROBERTS: The matter has to go before the Cabinet. It is utterly impossible for me to state the date exactly.

Mr. RAMSDEN: 26.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether the Army authorities had more than a year's supply of hay purchased; whether he was aware that owing to the light crop of this season hay buyers were offering £15 to £20 a ton, when the control price was now £10 a ton; and, in view of these facts, whether he would keep the control, on another twelve months, to allow the small consumer fair treatment?

Sir A. GEDDES: I have been asked to reply to this question. As regards the first part, I am informed by the War Office that, while it is impossible to state accurately the length of time for which the supplies of hay held by the Army will last, owing to the uncertainty as to the number of horses that will be retained, the supplies will certainly not be sufficient to meet Army requirements for twelve months. I am aware that high prices are being offered for 1919 hay. I am not yet in a position to make any statement as to the Government's intentions with regard to future control.

Sir J. D. REES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the hay purchased last year is not yet paid for or removed?

Sir A. GEDDES: No, Sir; I was not aware that it had not been paid for. I was aware some of it had not been removed.

Sir J. D. REES: Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly expedite both operations in the interest of those concerned?

Mr. ACLAND: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is always possible to get an advance of 75 per cent on the price?

Sir A. GEDDES: Yes, I am aware of that. I will draw the attention of the Secretary of State for War to the matter.

Mr. JODRELL: 27.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he was aware of the great dissatisfaction among farmers at the Regulations of the hay control; and whether he would take steps to have their interests protected, and this matter put on a more satisfactory footing without delay?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN: Yes, Sir. I am aware of the dissatisfaction referred to by my hon. Friend. The subject of the control of hay is at present under consideration by the Government.

Sir F. BLAKE: 63.
asked the Food Controller whether it is proposed to control this year's hay crop; and whether, if that is done, there will be a modification or abolition of the charges which were payable to the middlemen under the recent Orders and Regulations?

Mr. ROBERTS: As already stated, this matter is under consideration. If it is decided to frame any scheme of control, the suggestion of the hon. Baronet will be borne in mind.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

PLAYING FIELDS.

Sir W. DAVISON: 29.
asked the Minister of Health whether he was aware that a large amount of land in the vicinity of towns hitherto used as playing fields was now being scheduled for housing schemes, in anticipation of the Housing, Town Planning, etc., Bill becoming law; and whether he would take immediate steps to secure the retention of adequate facilities for open-air games in the vicinity of all towns, especially having regard to the fact that by the building of additional houses the existing playing fields required extension rather than curtailment, as was likely to be the case unless immediate action was taken?

Mr. PARKER (Lord of the Treasury): My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to say to what extent preliminary negotiations are being undertaken by local authorities for the acquisition of land hitherto used as playing-fields, but he fully appreciates the importance of the consideration to which the hon. Member refers, and the matter is one which will be carefully borne in mind by the Housing Commissioners in connection with particular schemes submitted by individual local authorities.

Sir W. DAVISON: Will the local authorities have power to purchase land for playing-fields in connection with housing schemes, and to hire these lands out to the public for amusements?

Mr. PARKER: My hon. Friend had better put down a question about that.

UPTON AND DARLASTON.

Mr. A. SHORT: 31.
asked the Minister of Health whether the Upton Urban District Council and the Darlaston Urban District Council, respectively, had submitted housing schemes; and, if so, what was their nature?

Mr. PARKER: My right hon. Friend presumes that the hon. Member intended to refer to the Tipton Urban District Council. Schemes have been submitted to the Housing Commisioner both by that council and the Darlaston Urban District Council. The Commissioner has inspected eight sites at Tipton and provisionally approved them, subject to settlement of a reasonable price; at Darlaston eight sites
have been inspected and six provisionally approved, subject to the same condition. Satisfactory arrangements as to price have not yet been made in either case. In the meantime, the Commissioner has had under consideration the proposals for the lay-out of the sites and design of the houses, and suggestions for amendment of the plans have been made to the councils. My right hon. Friend is making inquiries with a view to ascertaining whether a settlement of the purchase of the sites by agreement can be expedited.

Mr. SHORT: Can the hon. Member tell us how many houses are involved, and whether there is any evidence to prove that the building of these houses has been held up?

Mr. PARKER: I cannot tell the hon. Member how many houses are involved in these schemes, but it is obvious that they are being held up because of the price of the land for the moment, whatever other reasons there may be.

CHERTSEY COUNCIL SCHEME (BISLEY).

Lieut.-Colonel RAW: 33.
asked the Minister of Health whether there had been any delay in approving the Chertsey Council housing scheme at Bisley on the part of the Ministry of Health; and whether there was any foundation for allegations that, on account of the officialism of his Department, it was impossible to proceed with this housing scheme?

Mr. PARKER: No, Sir. There has been no delay on the part of the Ministry of Health in dealing with the scheme to which the hon. and gallant Member refers, and my right hon. Friend is satisfied that there is no foundation for the allegations made in the second part of the question. The facts are that a site of 1.785 acres was selected by the council, who entered into a provisional agreement for its purchase for £225. The site was visited at the end of May by a representative of the Housing Commissioner, who approved it as being suitable for housing, subject to the purchase being made at a price corresponding with the valuation. The Inland Revenue valuer reported on the 13th June that, in his opinion, the value of the site was £90. In view of the difference between this sum and the amount which the district council were proposing to pay, the Commissioner suggested that the district valuer should be asked to negotiate the
purchase on behalf of the council. Pending the settlement of the price, the lay-out of the site and plans of the houses were dealt with by the Commissioner. As the council did not, apparently, take any steps to carry out the suggestion for negotiation, the Commissioner requested the valuer to take up this matter. The valuer inter viewed the owner on the 12th July, and it was arranged that the owner should write to him after considering the offer made. Receiving no reply, the valuer sent a reminder on the 24th and on the 28th received a reply from the owner's solicitors refusing the offer. My right hon. Friend thinks it regrettable that the district council did not themselves request the valuer to undertake negotiations on their behalf until the 24th July. My right hon. Friend is anxious to expedite housing schemes in every practicable way, but he is not prepared to pay prices for land which, as in the present case, are so substantially in excess of the valuation.

Oral Answers to Questions — BLIND PEOPLE (LEGISLATION).

Mr. A. SHORT: 30.
asked the Minister of Health whether he was aware that 700 sightless persons lived in London on less than 10s. each per week; whether similar circumstances prevailed in the provinces; and whether he would expedite legislation to deal with the problem of these sightless peoples?

Mr. PARKER: The Advisory Committee on the Blind have compiled much valuable information and statistics, which are under consideration at the Ministry of Health, both as to London and the rest of England. Certain Exchequer Grants-in-Aid are about to be disbursed to assist various agencies in their work for the blind, for which the regulations that have been prepared, after consultation with that Committee, will be issued in a few days. In reply to the concluding paragraph of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given on Wednesday last to the hon. Member for the Duddesdon Division of Birmingham on the matter.

Mr. SHORT: Can the hon. Member undertake to produce legislation on this matter?

Mr. PARKER: It is obvious I cannot undertake that, but my hon. Friend will see that the matter is being dealt with.

Oral Answers to Questions — TUBERCULOSIS (EX-SERVICE MEN).

Lieut.-Colonel RAW: 32.
asked the Minister of Health whether he had considered the Report of the Special Committee on Tuberculous ex-Service Men; and when it would be made public, as the matter was one of great urgency?

Mr. PARKER: My right hon. Friend has only received the Report of the Committee within the last few days. He will consider it at once, and discuss the matter with the Minister of Pensions, who jointly with himself appointed the Committee.

Oral Answers to Questions — EJECTMENT FROM PREMISES, MANCHESTER.

Major HURST: 34.
asked the Minister of Health whether he was aware of the threatened ejectment of the tenants of Phillips' quilt manufactory, Clifford Street, Manchester, and of Willson's bakery and café Oxford Road, Manchester, without being given any option to purchase their respective premises; whether he was aware that no alternative suitable site for either labour-employing works was available in the vicinity; and whether he had (in pursuance of his promise of the 11thJuly) brought to the Government's notice the question of giving industrial tenancies some legal protection against disturbance, such as a statutory extension of the time normally required for a valid notice to quit?

Mr. PARKER: As stated in the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. and gallant Member on the 7th July, the matter to which he refers is not one within the province of the Ministry of Health. In view, however, of the displacement of labour involved by the termination of tenancies in the circumstances mentioned, my right hon. Friend is in communication with the Minister of Labour on he subject, and will communicate with the hon. Member.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL SUPPLIES.

SUPPLIES FOR AGRICULTURE.

Major HOWARD: 35.
asked the Coal Controller whether he was aware that in rural districts there was a serious shortage if coal required for agricultural purposes; whether he would take steps to ensure an increased supply for the autumn cultiva-
tion; and would he make a statement showing the comparative percentage of pre-war quantities of coal forwarded to towns and rural districts, respectively, and the percentage of quantities forwarded during the last six months?

Sir A. GEDDES: I am not aware that the rural districts are affected to a greater extent than urban districts by the recent curtailment of output, but the District Coal and Coke Supplies Committees have been requested to instruct the collieries to give special attention to demands for coal for food production purposes. I regret that the material does not exist for the compilation of the statement asked for in the latter part of the question.

ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT.

Captain ORMSBY-GORE: 56.
asked the Prime Minister whether the action to be taken by the Government in respect of the coal industry arising out of the second Report of the Royal Commission presided over by Mr. Justice Sankey will be embodied in a Bill to be introduced in Parliament, or whether they propose to carry out their decision on that Report by executive action?

Mr. BONAR LAW (Leader of the House): The Government are giving careful consideration to the recommendations contained in the second Report of the Coal Industry Commission, and, as I have already said, the Prime Minister hopes to be in a position to make a statement on this subject before the Recess.

Oral Answers to Questions — EX-SERVICE MEN (EMPLOYMENT).

Lieut.-Colonel Sir F. HALL: 36.
asked the Secretary to the Treasury what were the 200 vacant positions in the Government service for which applications from girls and young women had recently been invited in the London "Gazette"; whether the possibility of utilising discharged service men who had been unable hitherto to find employment had been considered in reference to such posts; and whether he would state the respective number of girls and women employed in the permanent Government Departments before the War, at the time of the Armistice, and now?

Mr. BALDWIN (Joint Financial Secretary to the Treasury): The vacancies in question are vacancies in the authorised
establishments of women clerks in the Employment Department of the Ministry of Labour and in other Departments which had before the War a staff of permanent women clerks. Ex-soldiers would not be suitable for appointment to these posts, which are required for work peculiarly suitable for women. The total number of women and girls employed in all Civil Departments (including local offices throughout this country and temporary as well as permanent staff) at the dates asked for are approximately as follows:

1st August 1914

45,000


11th November 1918
…
220,000 


1st July 1911
…
170,000

Captain TERRELL: 52.
asked the Prime Minister whether there is any Government Department which has assumed the responsibility of recommending to employers that they should carry out their pre-war promises of re-engaging men who joined the Army in the time of the country's need?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Wardle): The Ministry of Labour through the local employment committees are constantly drawing the attention of employers to their obligations in this respect.

Oral Answers to Questions — POLICEWOMEN, SCOTLAND.

Major W. MURRAY: 37 and 38.
asked the Secretary for Scotland (1) whether women employed upon police duties in Scotland are paid by local authorities out of the Police Grant; and, if not, whether he will introduce legislation to enable this to be done; (2) whether, in view of the fact that police duties of many kinds have been satisfactorily performed by women, he will consider the advisability of legalising the appointment of women police in Scotland?

The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Munro): Local authorities have been informed that Police Grant will be payable in respect of women engaged on police duties. In view, however, of the special and dangerous nature of some of their duties, I am not prepared to recommend legislation which would confer upon women the complete status and place them under the full liabilities of policemen.

Oral Answers to Questions — DEMOBILISED OFFICERS (UNIVERSITY CAREERS).

Sir PHILIP MAGNUS: 43.
asked the Minister of Labour whether the maintenance arrangements for demobilized officers whose university careers have been interrupted will be settled in time to enable thorn to resume their studies early in October?

Mr. WARDLE: I am informed that some 4,000 awards have already been made by the President of the Board of Education to demobilised officers and men who have resumed or will resume full-time courses in higher education. These awards are being notified as quickly as possible, and it is hoped that all officers who have made the necessary application will know the result of their applications before October. Grants are already being paid to a number of candidates who have resumed their courses.

Sir J. D. REES: May I ask if the finances of the country are in such a condition as to allow this counsel of perfection of sending four thousand officers to school at the taxpayer's expense to a university?

Mr. WARDLE: That is a question which should be addressed elsewhere.

An HON. MEMBER: May I ask whether the soldiers to whom this grant has been made have yet been demobilised or will they be released before October?

Mr. WARDLE: Every effort will be made to get them released by the beginning of October.

Oral Answers to Questions — EX-SOLDIERS (AGRICULTURAL TRAINING).

Colonel Sir J. HOPE: 44.
asked the Minister of Labour what sum has been allocated to the Scottish Board of Agriculture for making training grants and granting agricultural scholarships to ex-soldiers; whether he is aware that the Board have been compelled to refuse grants and scholarships to desirable and qualified applicants on account of shortage of funds and have applied for an increased allocation; and whether it is intended to give this increased allocation?

Mr. MUNRO: I have been asked to reply to this question. The Treasury have now sanctioned an increase from
£6,000 to £24,000 in the allocation to the Board for the provision of Agricultural Scholarships to ex-soldiers. This provision will enable the Board to deal with any pending cases.

Sir J. HOPE: May I ask when that extra provision was made and when a decision as to the previously rejected candidates may be expected in order that they may know their fate quickly?

Mr. MUNRO: A decision has just been made, and the position as to rejected candidates will be immediately considered.

Oral Answers to Questions — PEACE TREATY.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in case reservations to the Peace Treaty are carried in the Senate of the United States of America, the Treaty will be redrafted; and, in that case, will the House of Commons be given an opportunity of debating any alterations?

Mr. BONAR LAW: This question is hypothetical, and therefore I cannot answer it.

Mr. HOGGE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether our approval is contingent on the approval of the American Senate?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I would rather have notice of any question on this subject. I think the House realises that ratification becomes effective as soon as it has been agreed to by three Great Powers.

Mr. HOGGE: That is the Peace Treaty. This question is about the Anglo-French Treaty. May—

An HON. MEMBER: No, it is the Peace Treaty.

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: May we take it that the Government have considered the course they would adopt in the event of the United States making reservations?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think the attitude of the Government and of the House of Commons was made perfectly plain in the discussion.

Oral Answers to Questions — FINLAND.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether the
recently-elected President of the Republic of Finland, Professor Stahlberg, has declared himself as being opposed to interference with the internal affairs of Russia; whether he has been recognised by the Allies as President of Finland; and whether his election will bring about any change in British policy in the Eastern Baltic?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: No information has been received regarding the attitude of the President of the Republic of Finland, Professor Stahlberg, towards Russia. As regards the second part of the question, no specific steps have been taken to recognise the new President of Finland, as this is not considered necessary in view of the recognition of the independence of Finland by the Allies. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative.

Oral Answers to Questions — ITALY AND AUSTRIA (FOOD).

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 48.
asked the Prime Minister whether he has any official information of suffering in Vienna and other Austrian towns caused by the shortage of milk, and of similar suffering in Northern Italy; if so, what steps are being taken to relieve this suffering in Italy and Austria; and whether it is proposed to force the Austrians to hand over a number of milch cows to the Allies under the terms of Peace with Austria?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. So far as Vienna and other Austrian towns are concerned the prompt and sustained action of the Allied and Associated Governments in distributing milk, particularly to invalids, nursing mothers and young children, has gone far to relieve the suffering due to inadequate nutrition during the War. Some 6,000 tons of condensed milk have been sent to Austria, and it is understood that America will provide a further 2,500 tons during the present month. In Northern Italy the privation is less acute owing to the greater facilities for affording relief.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL COMMISSION ON AGRICULTURE.

Major HOWARD: 50.
asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction at the knowledge that the
Royal Commission on Agriculture has been sitting in private and has decided to continue doing so; and whether he will request the Commission to sit in public, and to have their proceedings officially reported, so that Members of this House and the public generally may be able to follow the evidence given?

Captain TERRELL: 51.
asked the Prime Minister whether the proceedings of the Royal Commission on Agriculture are to be held privately; what arc the reasons for this course; and whether, in the interests of the public, this decision should be immediately reversed?

Sir FORTESCUE FLANNERY: 58.
asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the reported decision of the Commission on Agriculture that their proceedings shall be conducted in private; and whether he can make representations to the Commission that in so important an Inquiry the fullest publicity is essential at all stages to ensure confidence in the ultimate recommendations of the Commission?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The question of the admission of the Press and public to the sittings on a Royal Commission is entirely one for the Commission itself to decide, and I have no power to interfere in any way with the discretion of the Commission in this case. The evidence laid before it will, as is usual in the case of such Commissions, be published in due course, and I understand that the Commission proposes to issue an official report of its proceedings to the Press at the end of each day's sittings.

Sir F. FLANNERY: Is it not in the power of the Government to draw the attention of the Commission to the matter and to state what is the opinion of all agriculturists?

Mr. BONAR LAW: As the Government have no power to interfere. I hardly think they have the right to make such a suggestion.

Mr. McNEILL: Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that an expression of opinion from the Government would be desirable?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think there are objections to that. The rule in regard to Royal Commissions is quite definite, and I hardly think it would be right to make an exception in this case.

Major LANE-FOX: Will they have any power to suppress portions of the evidence published?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think not.

Oral Answers to Questions — SUMMER TIME

Captain TERRELL: 53.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the varying criticisms regarding the adoption of summer time, he proposes to appoint a Committee to investigate its operation, so as to arrive at what should be a definite permanent policy on the whole subject?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Shortt): My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. Very few criticisms have reached the Home Office for a long time past, and it is believed that the general feeling is strongly in favour of the continuance of the system. If any further representations on the subject are submitted, they will of course be carefully considered by the Government, but as at present advised I see no occasion for a further inquiry.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHARITIES (REGISTRATION).

Mr. BRIANT: 54.
asked the Prime Minister if he will consider the desirability of the compulsory registration of all charities making public appeals for assistance, and compelling them to lodge a full and audited statement of their accounts which should be accessible to all wishing to sec them?

Mr. SHORTT: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Central Southwark on the 30th April last, to which I have nothing to add at present.

Oral Answers to Questions — FEDERAL DEVOLUTION (INQUIRY).

MR SPEAKER TO BE CHAIRMAN.

Sir J. HOPE: 55.
asked the Prime Minister when he will be able to announce the steps which the Government propose to take in order to give effect to the Resolution of this House on 4th June that a Parliamentary body should be appointed to consider and report upon Federal Devolution?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I am sure the House will be glad to know that Mr. Speaker has
consented to act as Chairman of the Parliamentary body, and I hope that it may be possible to announce its composition at an early date.

Colonel YATE: Will the names be announced before the Recess?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I hope so, and I expect so.

Oral Answers to Questions — MINISTRY OF PROPAGANDA.

Sir F. FLANNERY: 57.
asked the Prime Minister whether the Ministry of Propaganda has entirely ceased its operations; and, if so, whether it is the intention of the Government to organise some system of propaganda upon the necessity for increased national production and economy, and other similar economic and social questions about which there is no difference of political opinion?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, but, as already stated, certain of its functions are being carried on by other Government Departments. The Government is taking all possible steps to bring before the public the necessity for increased production and economy and the present and prospective industrial situation.

Oral Answers to Questions — PRIME MINISTER (ATTENDANCE AT HOUSE).

Colonel ROUNDELL: 60.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Prime Minister could arrange to attend this House at Question Time, on, perhaps, two days a week for a few minutes in order to give hon. Members an opportunity of addressing important questions to him in regard to Government policy?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I can add nothing to what I said in reply to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine and Western on Thursday last.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUSSIA.

ATTITUDE TOWARDS SOVIET GOVERNMENT.

Sir F. HALL: 61.
asked the Lord Privy Seal what steps are to be taken with regard to the settlement of our future relations with Russia in view of the decision to withdraw all British troops before the com-
mencement of next winter; whether any negotiations have yet been opened with the present Russian Government on the matter; and, if, in connection with any arrangements that may be made, the Government will have regard to the desirability of re-opening trading relations with Russia on the most favourable terms possible in view of the importance of securing further markets for British manufacturers?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: The decision to withdraw the British troops from Russia does not involve any change in the attitude of His Majesty's Government towards the Soviet Government. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. I am fully alive to the importance of securing further markets for British exports.

Sir F. HALL: Are we to understand that the Government are not taking any steps, but are leaving it to our enemies to make all the advances in regard to Russia?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: My hon. and gallant Friend is not to understand that. The Government is doing everything it possibly can under the most difficult circumstances.

Captain W. BENN: Are we enforcing the blockade against Russia?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: I must have notice of a question of that kind.

BRITISH SUBJECTS' INTERESTS.

Sir F. HALL: 19.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any official information showing that the commissary for the defence of Petrograd has ordered that all foreigners and their families are to be concentrated in a special camp, from which they are to be sent on compulsory labour; if so, what action the Government proposes to take to protect the interests of British subjects in this matter; and, if the Government has not official information on the subject, whether he will take steps to ascertain the facts, in order that the interests of British citizens in Russia may not continue to be jeopardised by failure to secure accurate information with regard to their treatment, and to take the necessary steps to enforce the ordinary rules of international usage in such matters?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second and third parts of the hon. and gallant Member's question, His Majesty's Government have the interests of the British subjects in Russia under constant consideration, and hope eventually to arrange for their departure from the parts of Russia in the power of the Soviet Government. I must, however, remind my hon. and gallant Friend that, as there are no longer any Allied or neutral representatives, either Diplomatic or Consular, in Russia, and as the two British Red Cross representatives who recently visited the country were made to leave in May last, it is extremely difficult to obtain any accurate information, or bring any pressure to bear upon the Soviet Government in the matter.

Sir F. HALL: Do we understand that any of our people who are unfortunately in Petrograd, and are in this condition, are to be left there without any help being rendered to them?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: My hon. and gallant Friend must not understand anything of the kind. Every possible help will be given to British subjects in Russia, subject to the extraordinary attitude of the Soviet Government, and the circumstances of the case.

Sir F. HALL: After that emphatic answer, can my hon. and gallant Friend tell me, at all events, what is being done with regard to that?

Sir H. GREENWOOD: If I were to disclose everything that we were trying to do, it would defeat the very object we have in view.

Sir F. HALL: Does my hon. and gallant Friend recognise that this was the general answer that was given by members of the Government?

Oral Answers to Questions — FOOD SUPPLIES.

FRUIT PRICES.

Mr. T. GRIFFITHS: 62.
asked the Food Controller if he is aware that 1s. 6d. per lb. is being charged for plums and 9d. per lb. is being charged for home grown apples in the Pontypool district; and whether he intends fixing prices for the autumn fruit in order to put an end to this profiteering?

Mr. ROBERTS: The maximum retail price of apples, whether home-grown or imported, has been fixed at 9d. per lb. In certain circumstances where home-grown apples could be sold below this figure, retailers should understand that 9d. per lb. is a maximum price and not a fixed price, and that the public should always have the benefit of cheap supplies. In some districts apples are now being sold at 4d. and 5d. per lb. In the ease of plums, the maximum price which may be paid by jam manufacturers has been fixed, but it is not at present proposed to fix other maximum prices for autumn fruits.

Mr. CLYNES: Can my right hon. Friend state whether he has; now completed the Regulations of which he spoke in the House a few days ago, that were to be framed with a view to preventing profiteering?

Mr. ROBERTS: No. I think, perhaps, I was slightly misunderstood then. I presume my right hon. Friend is referring to a reply made by me to a supplementary question, and if my memory serves me rightly, I then stated that I realised that the strongest possible action ought to be taken and that I had. been making representations to that effect; it was not a reply that I was drafting fresh Regulations, but that I was making representations to the Home Office.

Captain W. BENN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the Government is putting a protective duty on saccharine and so raising the price of these things?

Mr. ROBERTS: That is one of the sweet-stuffs that is not under my control.

Mr. KENNEDY JONES: Can he give us the names of the towns where apples are being sold at 4d. and 5d. a pound?

Mr. ROBERTS: I think I had better have notice of that question.

Oral Answers to Questions — ST. HELENA.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: 64.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state who is the officer commanding the troops in St. Helena; what is his salary; and what troops does he command?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Lieut.-Colonel Amery): The officer commanding the
troops in St. Helena is Lieut.-Colonel W. Dixon, Royal Marine Artillery. He draws, in addition to his pay from naval funds, half the salary of the office of Governor from the funds of the Island. With regard to the garrison of the island, perhaps my hon. Friend will address a question to the Admiralty.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: Does not my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary know how many men this valuable officer is commanding?

Lieut.-Colonel AMERY: The details of garrisons under the Admiralty are kept by the Admiralty.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: Is it not a fact that this officer is really doing nothing, and has not more than half a dozen troops under his command?

Lieut.-Colonel AMERY: I am aware that the garrison is small, but the officer is busy with work not only in connection with the garrison, but in the administration of the Colony.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: 65.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies who is paying the salaries, and to what amount, of the officials of St. Helena who have been on leave for over two years?

Lieut.-Colonel AMERY: The Governor of St. Helena is drawing half the salary of his office from the funds of the island. The other officials in question are in receipt of pay from Army funds only.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: May I know what the gentlemen who have been on leave for over two years are doing, and why do not they go back?

Lieut.-Colonel AMERY: I think I have already explained to my hon. Friend that these gentlemen have been doing work connected with the War on this side, and their place has been quite adequately filled during the war conditions.

Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: While they are doing war work here, are the funds of the Colony being called upon to pay their salary?

Lieut.-Colonel AMERY: I have just said that with the exception of the Governor, who is drawing half the salary of his office, the others are entirely drawing pay from Army funds, and the Colony is benefiting thereby.

Oral Answers to Questions — BELGIAN FLAG INCIDENT, MALMEDY.

Colonel Sir J. REMNANT: 67.
asked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the hauling down of the Belgian flag at Malmédy on the 20th July by order of the town commandant, General Hyslop, so as not to hurt German feelings; and whether this officer has been ordered to desist in the future from similar action, seeing that Malmédy has been assigned to Belgium by the Peace Treaty?

Captain GUEST (Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury): The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, British Army of the Rhine, has forwarded a report of this incident to the War Office, which goes to show that the published accounts of it are not accurate. It was only by a misunderstanding that the flag in question was hoisted in the first instance. The flag was not hauled down by the direct order of General Hyslop, but was taken down on the expiration of the period for which it was intended to remain up. It is the considered policy of our military authorities in the occupied territory to prevent the display of any form of partisan feeling before such territory is formally handed over and evacuated by our troops. Special regard for German susceptibilities does not enter into the question at all. As regards the latter part of the question, Section 34 of the Peace Treaty contains a proviso regarding Malmédy which gives the population the right to appeal to the League of Nations as to the future ownership of this area.

Sir J. REMNANT: May Iask whether his attention has been called to the discussion which took place in the French Chamber, in which the Minister for French Foreign Affairs agreed and admitted that the incident was as stated in my question, and how is it that the hon. Gentleman now says that it was not so?

Captain GUEST: The Debate referred to in the French Chamber had not come before my notice before I prepared this answer, but the telegram from our representative in Brussels, and also the accounts published in Belgium of this incident, are in direct conflict with those of our own General Officer on the spot.

Sir J. REMNANT: Now that my hon. Friend's attention has been called to it, will he look into the case that I have re-
ferred to as stated in the French Chamber, and I will ask another question in a short time?

Captain GUEST: Yes, certainly.

Mr. R. McNEILL: What in the world is meant by saying that no signs of partisan feeling are to be shown in the occupied territories? Does it mean that no preference for the Allies over our enemies is to be shown?

Captain GUEST: This is not a question of showing feeling as between the Allies and our enemies. It is a case of the display of flags as between the Allies. This particular territory, under the League of Nations, would probably go to Belgium if the population decided accordingly.

Sir J. REMNANT: Is it not a fact that the Belgian flag was hauled down over the British quarters, and the German flag put up?

Captain GUEST: No; there is no suggestion that that is so either in the question or in the papers.

Oral Answers to Questions — DEMOBILISATION.

TROOPS IN INDIA.

Mr. BENNETT: 68.
asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of members of the Territorials in India who have been on active service since the year 1914; if he is aware of the dissatisfaction which has been aroused in this country by the detention in India of demobilised men who were on their way home from Mesopotamia, a dissatisfaction that has been aggravated by unfounded reports in the Press that these men had volunteered for further service; and if he can give an assurance that, in the absence of unexpected trouble, the men of the Territorial Forces who joined thus early in the War shall be released in time to be at home before Christmas, 1919?

Captain GUEST: The approximate numbers of Territorials in India who have been on active service since 1914 are 8,000. Owing to the situation in that country, all men arriving there for demobilisation have been detained. Individual cases of dissatisfaction have been reported, and are probably due to the temporary suspension of demobilisation. Regiments of post-war garrison are now being sent to India to relieve the troops retained there, and, as I
have already stated, these men from Mesopotamia will be the first troops to leave India. I would refer my hon. Friend to the Memorandum published on the 17th July, in which I stated that it is expected that the Regular troops who are to form the permanent garrison will all be dispatched by the end of this year.

Sir J. D. REES: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these men strenuously deny that they volunteered, and that is at the root of the dissatisfaction?

Captain GUEST: The question is aggravated by unfounded reports in the Press that these men have volunteered for service, but the War Office cannot be responsible for unfounded reports in the Press.

Sir J. D. REES: Has not the War Office tacitly adopted that contention in the Press?

Captain GUEST: The War Office never tacitly adopts anything.

Mr. ATKEY: Is it not a fact that the Secretary of State for War said in this House that all these men had volunteered for service in India, whereas letters are now arriving which show that statement to be absolutely and entirely untrue?

Captain GUEST: I think the hon. Member has misinterpreted this question, which deals with the question of troops who are detained in India. They are first on the list for return, owing to the fact that they have been in Mesopotamia.

Mr. CAUTLEY: Can we be told when the last of these men will leave India?

Captain GUEST: Yes. As nearly as possible they will commence returning at the very moment the hot weather is over, and they will all be brought home from India before the ordinary demobilisation is proceeded with in that country. That ought, with good fortune, to be before the end of the year.

Oral Answers to Questions — ASIA MINOR (MASSACRES).

Lieut.-Colonel A. HERBERT: 71.
asked the Secretary of State for War if Reports have been sent to the War Office of the massacres of natives in the districts of Smyrna, Aidin, and Pergamos, by or owing to the presence of Greek troops; and what
steps it is proposed to take in the interests of the British Empire to put an end to these massacres?

Captain GUEST: With regard to the first part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question, I have nothing to add to the answers given on this subject on the 24th July last by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for the Foreign Office. As regards the last part, it is hoped that the appointment of the Special Commission of Inquiry mentioned by my hon. Friend, and the steps now being taken to bring all troops in Western Asia Minor to recognise the authority of General Milne, will effectualy check any further recurrence of the disorders.

Oral Answers to Questions — MILITARY COMMAND, AIDIN.

Lieut.-Colonel HERBERT: 72.
asked the Secretary of State for War who is in supreme command in the vilayet of Aidin; and to whom is this officer responsible?

Captain GUEST: In virtue of a recent decision of the Peace Conference, any future movement of the Allied forces shall be under the supreme direction of the Commander-in-Chief, who is responsible to the Conference for military operations in the Asiatic portion of the Turkish Empire. The vilayet of Aidin will, therefore, fall to the command of General Milne.

Oral Answers to Questions — MISSING BRITISH SOLDIERS.

Mr. R. McNEILL: 75.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether the search of German records which was proceeding on the 26th of May to ascertain the fate of missing British soldiers has yet been completed; if so, with what result; whether any officers or men recorded as missing in casualty lists have been traced as having been prisoners of war in Germany; if so, whether any such men have survived; what steps have been taken to make sure that no hitherto untraced prisoners of war are still alive in enemy countries, including Turkey; and whether a reward has been offered for the discovery of any such prisoners who may still be alive and untraced?

Captain GUEST: The Military Mission in Berlin, which has been at work for the greater part of this year, has not yet completed its labours, and will not be able to
do so for some time. The result, so far, is that a few names, which we had recorded as missing only, have been discovered as dead in the German records, and the Mission have reported that it appears from their investigations that there are very few cases of men who were prisoners in Germany whose names were not known to the War Office. No such men have been found alive. In order that no stone may be left unturned, a complete list of the missing is now being sent to Berlin for comparison with the German records, but it is feared that this will lead to very little, if any, result In the East and in Italy, after the Armistice, steps were taken to examine all returning prisoners for any information they might have regarding the missing, and a considerable amount of information was so obtained. Wherever there was evidence of officers or men having been in enemy hands, this was referred for special investigation. Lists of the missing are to be sent to the military authorities in Austria and Bulgaria for comparison with enemy records, and also to Constantinople if the military authorities there consider it feasible to undertake such a comparison. It is feared, however, that there is no possibility of there being any untraced prisoners who are still alive. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative. After full consideration, it was thought better policy not to offer awards.

Oral Answers to Questions — ARMY OFFICERS' RETIRED PAY (COMMUTATION).

Major GLYN: 78.
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether it is the intention of the Government to adhere to the terms of the 1913 Regulations of the Royal Warrant, which laid down distinctly that an officer on attaining the age of forty might be permitted to commute a portion of his retired pay, subject to conditions that might be laid down from time to time by the Army Council; whether it was ever intended that an officer who had retired in 1913 under those conditions should now, having reached the required age of forty, be unable to commute any portion of his retired pay as a result of a condition made during the War by the Army Council; and whether he will consider the revision of the Army Council conditions on this point?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster): Commutation of officers' retired pay is now again allowed under slightly modified rules, a copy of which I shall be glad to send my hon. and gallant Friend.

Oral Answers to Questions — CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

Mr. ACLAND: 79.
asked the Home Secretary whether any conscientious objectors are still in prison or under any sort of control, or, if released, remain under any conditions or obligations?

Mr. SHORTT: There is no conscientious objector now in prison or under control, and no conscientious objector temporarily released from prison will be required to complete his sentence.

Sir F. HALL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are an enormous number of 1914–15 men who have not yet been demobilised?

Mr. SHORTT: They are not conscientious objectors.

Sir F. HALL: They have been penalised by reason of these conscientious objectors.

Mr. R. McNEILL: Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a Motion on the Order Paper of this House in the names of something like 100 Members protesting against the release of conscientious objectors to compete with demobilised soldiers?

Mr. SHORTT: Perhaps my hon. and learned Friend will put that question to the War Office.

Oral Answers to Questions — WAR DECORATIONS (MERCANTILE MARINE).

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 1.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is proposed to grant the Victory Medal to officers and men of the Mercantile Marine?

Sir A. GEDDES: Officers and men of the Mercantile Marine are eligible to receive the Mercantile Marine War Medal in special recognition of the peculiarly valuable services they rendered to the national and Allied cause. The grant of this medal will be strictly confined to merchant officers and seamen, and will not be extended to any other class of persons.
This decision is based on a desire specially to honour the British Mercantile Marine by the grant to them of a medal officially accorded precedence over the Victory Medal. They will, of course, receive the British War Medal.

Captain W. BENN: Can the right hon. Gentleman make a statement about the 1914–15 Star for the Mercantile Marine?

Sir A. GEDDES: That does not arise. The Mercantile Marine War Medal is a separate thing. The War Medal and 1914–15 Star are controlled by the War Office.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES (UNIVERSITY STUDENTS).

Mr. C. BARRIE: 76.
asked the Secretary of State for War if it. is the intention of the Government to make grants to university students who were attending agricultural colleges prior to the War, and whose studies have been interrupted by reason of their service, in the same manner as grants have been given to university students in medicine and arts?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN: Yes, Sir. The answer to my hon. Friend's question is in the affirmative.

Oral Answers to Questions — POLICE STRIKE.

HOME SECRETARY'S STATEMENT.

Mr. CLYNES: (by Private Notice) asked the Home Secretary whether he can make a statement as to the present position arising out of the police strike; whether the strike has assumed more serious dimensions than those outlined by him last week; whether he is aware that the strike has been precipitated by the introduction and passage of the Police Bill so far as certain of its provisions are concerned; that the trouble has been aggravated by the decision that all constables who have abstained from duty are to be dismissed with forfeiture of pension; and whether he will consider the advisability of withdrawing this Order—[HON. MEMBERS: "No!"]—pending an attempt to secure a settlement of the trouble by conciliatory methods. [HON. MEMBEBS: "No!"]

Mr. SHORTT: The number of police who have refused duty has increased slightly, but not so as materially to alter
the situation. The numbers are now 1,056 in the Metropolitan Police out of a force of 19,000, fifty-seven in the City of London Police out of a force of 1,170, 932 in Liverpool out of 2,100, 118 in Birmingham out of 1,256, 106 in Birkenhead, sixty-three in Bootle and one in Wallasey. No men in any other force have refused duty, and, on the contrary, in many forces meetings have been held at which the men have repudiated the policy of a strike.
As regards the suggestion that the strike has been precipitated by the introduction and passage of the Police Bill, this is true only to the extent that the officials of the union, knowing that the Bill would bring the union to an end, have used every endeavour by misstatements to persuade the police forces of the country to be false to their duty and their oath. I am informed, and believe, that the Bill is welcomed by a great majority of the police.
As regards the remainder of the question, I can only point out that this strike is not an industrial dispute to which ordinary methods of conciliation can be applied. It is, on the contrary, a definite act of mutiny on the part of those who have broken their oaths and who are setting aside their duty to their fellow citizens and attempting to defy the authority of Parliament. So long as the Government is responsible for the maintenance of law and the preservation of public order, it cannot entertain any question of compromise, nor can the question of reinstating those who have refused duty be considered.
I wish to take this opportunity of emphatically denying the statements that the Order dismissing all constables in the Metropolitan Police force who have refused duty will be rescinded. I also wish to repeat the assurance which I gave to this House on Friday last that the Bill is not intended to be, and is not in any way, an attack upon trades unions.

Mr. CLYNES: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware of action being taken by men in other trades and industries who are ceasing work in support of the action of the police force, and whether the decision he has just now announced to take no step to arrive at any sort of compromise or conciliation is not a totally different step from that which the Government itself frequently enjoins upon employers and employed in private industry?

Mr. SHORTT: The difference that my right hon. Friend must appreciate is this: Conciliation in an industrial dispute is in regard to settling a difference and bringing the men back to work. In the police strike the question of the men going back to work does not and cannot possibly arise. I am well aware of what a few other people are doing—the railwaymen for instance—and I am aware that certain resolutions are reported to have been passed of which I have received notice. But I am not aware of anything that shows in any way whatever that the decision of the Government is not absolutely right.

Mr. CLYNES: Is it not a fact that in dealing with the previous stoppage or threat of stoppage on the part of the police force, a representative of the Government met representatives of the Police Union; and in view of that fact, and in view of the present stoppage and threat of an even more extended stoppage, is it not the more advisable for the right hon. Gentleman to meet them again?

Mr. SHORTT: No, Sir; that is not correct. No member of the Government ever met any representative of the National Union of Police and Prison Officers. They met in September last certain representatives of the policemen, but no representative of the union at all. So far as the rest of my right hon. Friend's supplementary question is concerned, we cannot depart from the position we have taken up.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Sir F. BANBURY: May I ask the Leader of the House whether it is the intention of the Government to take the Second Reading of the War Emergency Laws (Continuance) Bill after ten o'clock to-night?

Mr. BONAR LAW: If there be an opportunity we shall try to do so.

Sir F. BANBURY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Bill was only printed this morning, and that there will be very considerable opposition to it; and will he, in view of that fact, postpone taking the Second Reading till Members have had an opportunity of reading the Bill, which is of a very far-reaching cha-
racter, and which, I venture to say, will be unpopular with every Member of the House?

Mr. BONAR LAW: There really is no intention to try and force the Bill through to-night. If there should be any serious opposition to it, we should not take it.

Sir H. DALZIEL: May I inquire if there is any intention of making a statement as to whether or not the House is going to adjourn for a period this afternoon; and also can the right hon. Gentleman tell us, at the same time, when the House will rise next week?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The first question is, I think, one for you, Mr. Speaker. There is not any action being taken by the Government in the matter. As to the time of the House rising next week, I am sorry it is impossible as yet to give any definite date.

Captain ORMSBY-GORE: May I ask the Leader of the House whether it is his intention to take the Second Reading of the new Welsh Church Bill to-morrow afternoon, seeing that it is not yet printed and not in the hands of the Members, and, consequently, that we have not had an opportunity of seeing or considering it, and also seeing that the right hon. Gentleman did not on Thursday announce that he was going to take it?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I have considered that. I do not think it would be reasonable to take it on the date in question. It will be taken on Wednesday if there is time.

Sir DONALD MACLEAN: in view of the general desire of the House to view the River Pageant this afternoon, may I respectfully ask you, Sir, whether you have any suggestion to make to the House to meet that desire?

Mr. SPEAKER: The House will, no doubt, be desirous of doing what it can to salute the representatives of the Mercantile Marine as they pass. Probably it will be best if I quite informally suspend the sitting of the House for a reasonable interval. I therefore, propose to leave the Chair at four o'clock. When I resume the Chair I shall have the. bells rung, so that hon. Members may be aware of the fact.

Sir D. MACLEAN: May I ask the Leader of the House if he will be kind enough to tell us what procedure it is
intended to follow on. Wednesday on the Vote of Thanks to the Army, Navy, and Air Forces?

Lord HUGH CECIL: May we also know what are the other Orders the right hon. Gentleman means to take on Wednesday?

Mr. G. TERRELL: Do the Government propose to take any action in regard to the Report of the Select Committee on Transport in the Metropolitan area?

Mr. BONAR LAW: As I said last week, the later matter is being examined by the Departments. We hope to be able to do something with it before the House adjourns, but I cannot say definitely.

Sir F. HALL: Has my right hon. Friend communicated with the Departments which the Report is rather criticising?

Mr. BONAR LAW: The Government, naturally, must communicate with the Departments. As regards the procedure on Wednesday, it will be as follows: The Motion of Thanks, which will be put on the Order Paper to-morrow morning, will be moved, and, in addition to thanks to our own troops, a Motion will be made expressing the thanks of the House to Field-Marshal Foch, who commanded the British troops.
On Tuesday (to-morrow) the Prime Minister will hand in a Message signed by the King, recommending certain Grants, and this Message will be read, I understand, by you, Mr. Speaker, as usual.
On Wednesday, immediately after the Vote of Thanks, the consideration of the Grants will be taken in Committee.

Captain W. BENN: Would the right hon. Gentleman say when the Welsh Church Bill will be printed?

Mr. BONAR LAW: It will be available to-morrow.

Captain BENN: And taken on Wednesday?

Mr. BONAR LAW: Yes.

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: May I ask whether, in leaving the Chair this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, you will bring a Motion before the House, and, further, for what period do you propose to leave the Chair?

Mr. SPEAKER: It will all depend upon time and tide!

Lord H. CECIL: What business is to be taken after the Vote of Thanks and the Grants on Wednesday?

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think probably the Welsh Church Bill will be the third Order, but I will state to-morrow.

Mr. MacVEAGH: What is the urgency attaching to the Welsh Church Bill?

Mr. BONAR LAW: That will be discovered better when the Bill is discussed.

Mr. MacVEAGH: But some of us would like to discover it now!

Sir D. MACLEAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the terms of that Bill may be very highly controversial—I do not know, but I assume so, though perhaps not? I am sure the House would not really like, after the Vote of Thanks—in which we all can join—to go at once to a very highly-controversial measure, and I suggest that that Bill should not be put down for that day.

Mr. BONAR LAW: I am sure my right hon. Friend will agree that it is impossible for me to foresee the extent of controversy in connection with any Bill. In any case we must get on with the business, and the business of the Vote of Thanks will be completed and done with before the other measure arises.

Commander BELLAIRS: In reference to what the right hon. Gentleman has said about the Votes of Thanks and the Grants, may I ask when the sanction of the House will be asked for for these Grants?

Mr. BONAR LAW: That was given in my answer. The House will go into Committee immediately after the Votes of Thanks, and then the sanction of the House will be asked.

Sir J. REMNANT: I have not consulted with my Friends in the House, but I would like to ask whether it would be possible on the Vote of Thanks on Wednesday, by Amendment or otherwise, to add the name of our Prime Minister? It has been suggested that we should move a Vote of Thanks to Marshal Foch. I do not suppose it was intended to vote him a Grant, but I believe that there are a large number of hon. Members of this House who would be glad of some way by which the House of Commons itself can show its appreciation of all the Prime Minister has done during
these trying times. Could I move to add his name by way of an Amendment to the Vote of Thanks?

Mr. SPEAKER: Any Resolution proposed from the Chair is always open to Amendment.

Mr. BONAR LAW: I think it is only right to say that the suggestion of my hon. Friend has been put forward by a number of people to myself. I simply mentioned it to the Prime Minister, and he said that he would not dream of it.

Sir J. REMNANT: I was not thinking of a Grant; I was anxious to show some expression of thanks to him for what he has done

Commander BELLAIRS: May I say that it would be entirely against precedent to introduce the Prime Minister's name in connection with a Vote of Thanks to the Services?

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable dissatisfaction with regard to the procedure this afternoon amongst Scottish Members?

Mr. SPEAKER: That question can be raised when we get to Supply.

Mr. STURROCK: Can we have any indication when the House will resume its Sitting this afternoon?

Mr. SPEAKER: The bells will be rung, and they can be heard all over the House.

Mr. STURROCK: Will they ring before ten o'clock?

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, An Act to authorise the introduction of proportional representation in Local Elections; and for other purposes connected therewith." [Local Elections (Proportional Representation) Bill [Lords]

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE C.

SIR SAMUEL ROBERTS reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had added to Standing Committee C the following Ten Members (in respect of the
Patents and Designs Bill and the Trade Marks Bill): Captain Wedgwood Benn, Sir Stuart Coats, Sir Auckland Geddes, Mr. Thomas Griffiths, Mr. Hood, Major Lloyd-Greame, Sir George Croydon Marks, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Wallace, and Mr. Stephen Walsh.

STANDING COMMITTEE A.

Sir SAMUEL ROBERTS further reported from the Committee, That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A: Sir John Tudor Walters.

STANDING COMMITTEE E.

Sir SAMUEL ROBERTS further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee E (added in respect of the Ferries (Acquisition by County Councils) Bill) [Lords]: Brigadier-General Wigan.

Reports to lie upon the Table.

BILLS PRESENTED.

WELSH CHURCH (TEMPORALITIES) BILL,—"to continue in office the Welsh Commissioners appointed under the Welsh Church Act, 1914, to postpone the date of Disestablishment, and to make further provision with respect to the temporalities of and marriages in the Church in Wales," presented by Mr. SHORTT; supported by Major Baird and the Solicitor-General; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 164.]

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (IRELAND) BILL,—"to amend Section seventy-three of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland), 1877, as respects appointments to junior clerkships in the High Court," presented by Mr. MACPHERSON; supported by the Attorney-General for Ireland; to be read a second time Tomorrow, and to be printed. [Bill 165.]

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.— [20TH ALLOTTED DAY.]

[31ST JULY—REPORT.]

Resolutions reported,

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1919–20.

"1. That a sum, not exceeding £245,711, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during this year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, including certain Grants in Aid and certain Special Services arising out of the War.

2. That a sum, not exceeding £2,927,220, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland.

3. That a sum, not exceeding £21,177, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Fishery Board for Scotland and for Grants in Aid of Piers or Quays.

4. That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £1,131,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March,1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Fishery Board for Scotland, including Grants in Aid of Piers or Quays, and certain Special Expenditure in connection with the Purchase and Storing of Pickled Herrings.

5. That a sum, not exceeding £23,010,be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's Secretary for Scotland and Subordinate Offices, Expenses under the Inebriates Acts, 1879 to 1900, Expenses under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act.1899, and Expenses under tile National Registration Acts, 1915 and 1918. [Note.—£14,000 has been voted on account.]

6. That a sum, not exceeding £45,855,000,be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Ministry of Pensions, and for sundry Contributions in respect of the Administration of the Ministry of Pensions Act, 1916.

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1910–20.

CLASS I

7. That a sum, not exceeding £1 349,660,be granted to His Majesty, to complete the
sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class I. of the Estimates for Civil Services. [For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919, col. 2416, Vol. 118.]

CLASS II.

8. That a sum, not exceeding £3,796,403, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of Payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services. [For Services included in this Class, see OFFICAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919. col. 2417. Vol. 118.]

Class III.

9. That a sum, not, exceeding £7,850,379,be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class III. of the Estimates for Civil Services.[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIALREPORT. 31st July, 1919,cols. 2417–18, Vol. 118.]

Class IV.

10. That a sum not exceeding £19,854,570.be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IV. of the Estimates for Civil Services.[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July. 1919, cols. 2418–19, Vol. 118.]

Class V.

11. That a sum. not exceeding £ 696.246, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, l920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class V. of the Estimates for Civil Services.[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919, col. 2419. Vol. 118.]

Class VI.

12. That a sum, not exceeding £10,327,838, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VI. of the Estimates for Civil Services.[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919, col. 2420, Vol. 118.]

Class VII.

13. That a sum. not exceeding £25,987,265,be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VII. of the Estimates for Civil Services.[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919, col. 2420, Vol. 118.]

MINISTRY OF MUNITIONS (ORDNANCE FACTORIES).

14. That a sum, not exceeding £90, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st
day of March, 1920, for the Expense of the Ordnance Factories, the coat of the production of which will be charged to the Ministry of Munitions.

MINISTRY OF NATIONAL SERVICE.

15. That a sum, not exceeding £47,588, lie granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Ministry of National Service.

MINISTRY OF RECONSTRUCTION.

16. That a sum, not exceeding £33,878, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Ministry of Reconstruction.

MINISTRY OF LABOUR (CIVIL DEMOBILISATION AND RESETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT).

17. That a sum, not exceeding £21,373,593 (including a Supplementary sum of £9.500,000), be granted to His Majesty, to complete tin? Bum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Civil Demobilisation and Resettlement of the Ministry of Labour, including Out-of-Work Donation and the Contribution to the Un employed Insurance Fund, and Repayments to Associations pursuant to Sections 85 and 106 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, and the National Insurance Act, 1911, and the National Insurance (Part II.) (Munition Workers) Act, 1916, and Grants for the training of Demobilised Officers.

NATIONAL WAR SAVINGS COMMITTEE.

18. That a sum, not exceeding £65,540, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National War Savings Committee.

WAR TRADE DEPARTMENT.

19. That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in coarse of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the "War Trade Department.

RESTRICTION OF ENEMY SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT.

20. That a sum, not exceeding £19,164, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the Bum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1930, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Restriction of Enemy Supplies Department.

COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE DERAVITAILLEMENT.

21. That a sum, not exceeding £45,016, be granted to His, Majesty, to complete the
sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commission Internationale de Ravitaillement.

CENTRAL CONTROL BOARD (LIQUOR TRAFFIC).

22. That a sum, not exceeding £116,350), be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic), including the cost of acquisition and direct control of licensed premises and businesses and the provision of canteens.

IMPERIAL WAR GRAVES COMMISSION.

23. That a sum, not exceeding £937,347, be granted to His Majesty, to Complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Imperial War Graves Commission, formed under Royal Clavier, 10th May, 1917.

MILITARY SERVICE (CIVIL LIABILITIES) DEPARTMENT.

24. That a sum, not exceeding £4,092,103 (including a Supplementary sum of £2,400,000), be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Military Ser vice (Civil Liabilities) Department, and for the payment of Grants for assisting Officers and Men of His Majesty's Forces in cases of serious hardship to meet certain financial obligations, and Grants to facilitate their reinstatement in civil life.

ROYAL PATRIOTIC FUND.

25. That a sum, not exceeding £156.131, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in com se of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for a Grant-in-Aid of the Royal Patriotic Fund.

LOANS TO DOMINIONS AND ALLIES.

26. That a sum, not exceeding £110,000,000 (including a Supplementary sum of £60,000,000), be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Loans to the Governments of British Dominions and of Allied Countries, and for Loans and Grants for purposes of Reconstruction and Belief in War Areas.

CANAL COMPENSATION.

27. That a sum, not exceeding £600,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for Compensation to Canal Companies and Canal Carriers in the United Kingdom arising out of Government Control.

BREAD SUBSIDY.

28. That a sum, not exceeding £30,000,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1920, for the Cost of the Bread Subsidy.

TREASURY SECURITIES DEPOSIT SCHEME.

29. That a sum, not exceeding £925,407, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1920, for the Expenses connected with the Treasury Securities Deposit.

PROPERTY LOSSES (IRELAND) COMPENSATION.

30. That a sum, not exceeding £160.000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for ex gratia Grants in respect of Losses and Injuries sustained in the Rebellion in Ireland.

MISCELLANEOUS WAE SERVICES (FOREIGN OFFICE).

31. That a sum, not exceeding £1,835,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1920, for the cost of certain Miscellaneous war Services.

PURCHASE OF HOUSING MATERIALS (ENGLAND AND WALES).

32. That a sum, not exceeding £5,500,000. be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Cost of Building Materials for the Housing of the Working Classes in England and Wales.

PURCHASE OF HOUSING MATERIALS (SCOTLAND).

33. That a sum, not exceeding £1,503,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the Cost of Building Materials for the Housing of the Working Classes in Scotland.

COAL MINES DEFICIENCY.

34. That a sum, not exceeding £26 400,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, to meet the Deficiency arising under the Coal Mines Control Agreement (Confirmation)Act, 1918, and the cost of carrying out the recommendations contained in the Interim Report of the Chairman of the Coal Industry Commission, dated 20th March, 1919, and for kindred purposes.

REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1919–20.

35. That a sum, not exceeding £4,887,044, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for
Expenditure in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments. [For Services herein included, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st July, 1919, col 2425, Vol. 118.]

NAVY ESTIMATES, EXCESS 1917–18.

36. That a sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to His Majesty, to defray one Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1918, to make good Excesses of Navy Expenditure beyond the grants for the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1918."

BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, SCOTLAND.

First Resolution read a second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution.

Mr. HOGGE: borne comment has already been made with winch most of us will agree. I think it is rather unfortunate in prevailing circumstances that first of ail the Scottish Estimates this year have to be discussed on Report, and have not been in Committee, which, as hon. Members of this House know, renders it impossible to deal in that detail to which we are accustomed in our national affairs in this House. It is also unfortunate that the river procession takes place to-day, particularly because every Scottish Member, coming from a country which has furnished so many men for the Mercantile Marine, desires to show his appreciation of their services. Nevertheless, this cuts very much into our time, and it is unfortunate. After all, we have to make the best of the opportunity left to us, and I propose at once to set about with my criticisms.
The Vote for the Board of Agriculture this year raises a number of topics which are interesting, not only to Members who represent rural constituencies in Scotland, but also to those of us who represent urban communities. At any rate, there is one feature introduced into the Vote this year, namely, that which deals with the training in agriculture of demobilised officers and men of His Majesty's Forces, which brings the question of agriculture home to us in the urban communities, from whose constituencies many have joined the forces, and who now, when they have returned, display a desire not to return to their old avocations but to seize the opportunity provided by this Vote, which I was very glad to see has been largely increased, I think from £6.000 to £24,000. I am not sure that it is big enough yet but I am glad to say it has been increased.
They desire to take advantage of this Vote and train themselves for a new life. There is another item of interest to the Vote which I am glad to see. I note that the Grant-in-Aid, which is Item K, if I remember rightly, was suspended during the War, has again been placed in the Vote for this yea f. I shall have some questions to ask on that point, because, if my memory serves me rightly, the Grant which may have been paid during the years of the War was not accumulated for the purpose of the administration of the Act. That money went back, I believe, to the Treasury.

The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Munro): Yes; the Grant was reduced during the War to £10,000 a year instead of £22,000.

4.0 P.M.

Mr. HOGGE: That means that during the War money which might have been accumulating for the administration of the Small Landholders Act was not accumulating, and, as we all know, the number of men who could have been put on the land was very materially reduced. At any rate, whatever we may say later on when we resume the proceedings, there is some considerable satisfaction among the Scottish Members with the Vote of £185,000 for Agriculture, because if there is one thing which is more urgently required in Scotland than another to-day it is the speeding up and the quickening of the administration which is behind the Scottish Small Landholders Act. We look forward to the operation of that Act to help on the repopulation of many of our counties in Scotland, and to the Act providing for the resuscitation of rural life in our Scottish communities. The interference with the administration, both from the lack of men and the Jack of money, has meant to Scotland a large hiatus equalled by the length of the War in the operation of placing men upon the land.

Sitting suspended for River Procession (Sea Services Commemoration), on the Anniversary of Mobilisation, 4th August, 1914.

MR. SPEAKER resumed the Chair at twenty minutes before Sis of the Clock.

Mr. HOGGE: I wish that when the proceedings were interrupted someone else had been speaking, in order that when the Debate was resumed a Member of this House with more authority than myself could have referred to the pleasure and gratification with which we have all wit-
nessed the Pageant on the River. It was a Victory Pageant, but we hope that the River will be used for peaceful purposes for the remainder of our lives.
With regard to the particular Vote under discussion, I want to draw attention to the wasteful experiments which have 'been made by the Scottish Board of Agriculture in taking land for the purpose of settling soldiers on it after their return from the War. I would like to know, for instance, what progress has been made with the estates known as Borgie. During the War, the Duke of Sutherland presented this large estate to the Scottish Board of Agriculture, and a promise was held out at that time that a considerable number of men would he accommodated upon it as colonists. As far as my information goes, very little real progress has been made, and nothing practically has been done except in the way of improving the rest of the Duke's estate, through which a railway is to be made in order to reach Borgie. The last I heard of this particular estate and of the various experiments made by the Board of Agriculture was that those experiments had resulted in fewer than twenty men being placed on the land for any purpose at all. A great story was told of what would be done in afforestation combined with small holdings, but I am informed that all experiments in the way of afforestation have proved unsuccessful. I should like to hear how much this estate has cost the nation since it was taken over by the Scottish Board of Agriculture, and how many actual settlers arc at present to be found in that remote part of the country.
The second example of waste of expenditure on the part of the Board of Agriculture is to the found in the experiment tried with the estate of Midlocharwoods. As a matter of fact, a large part of this estate is under the high-water sea level. Its total area is 520 acres, and when it was taken over it was divided in the foil-owing way: There were 158 acres of fair arable land, 62 acres of very inferior land, and 340 acres were flooded "moorland. [An HON. MEMBER:" The estate was only 224 acres in extent!"] I am giving the-figures of the estate as it existed when it was in the possession of the Scottish Labour Colony from Glasgow. It was used as a colony for inebriates, tramps, and general wayfarers, and there was a dormitory, consisting of a wooden shanty,
providing accommodation for some thirty people. I should like to know a little of the history of that transaction. The estate was turned down as being absolutely unsuitable for the purposes for which it has now been taken. It was in December, 1916, that the proposal to take it over for the purposes of colonisation was absolutely turned down. It was not until the middle of 1917 that negotiations were reopened for the purpose of securing it, and it was actually purchased early in 1918, but as from Martinmas, 1917. At the time it was taken, the Dumfries Local War Pensions Committee protested strongly against its being acquired for any such purpose, and they asked the Department to hear them in opposition to the proposal to take it over for use as an ex-soldiers' colony. Under the Act of Parliament, under which it was proposed to take it, over three-fourths of the entire estate must be arable land, but we find in this case there are still remaining at least 300 acres of moorland, and all attempts to break up the estate and to use it as a settlement for soldiers and discharged men have so far entirely failed. I should like, therefore, in the case of Borgie and of Midlocharwoods, both of which are painful illustrations of experiments having been undertaken without sufficient care—I say I should like some information as to the cost and result.
The second point I want to put depends upon the first I tried to make. It is inadequacy of the provision. I want to deal now with the long delay which occurs between the application of a discharged man to the Scottish Board of Agricultures for land and his being actually planted upon it as a settler, but I will only cite one example as an illustration of what I mean, because the interruption which has occurred in this discussion does not leave a very long time for Members to take part in the Debate. But there was the case of a man named Duncan Watson, from Argyllshire. This lad was eighteen when he joined the Army. He served in the Army two and a half years; was severely wounded, and was for a long time in hospital. His for bear's had farmed land in that particular county with great success, and he was particularly anxious to get a small croft or a small holding where he could continue the occupation in which he had been trained. The curious thing about his application was this:
When it was first sent in it was referred to the Food Controller, presumably with the idea of ascertaining whether this land ought or ought not to be brought under food cultivation. The Food Controller turned the application down. Then there was an appeal to the Scottish Board of Agriculture, which also refused the application, and the last I heard of the matter was this, that the Scottish Board of Agriculture tried to get into touch with that well-known land reformer—the Duke of Argyll, who insisted that there was no reason why this lad should be put on the land, and who refused to move in the matter at all. I think I am quite fair in saying that that case is typical of many others. It is clear that the various efforts made from time to time by the Scottish Board of Agriculture to put men on the land have failed to a very considerable degree, and that there is not an appreciable number of men yet settled upon the land in spite of the big promises made in this direction.
This brings me to the third and last point I want to make. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leith (Captain Wedgwood Benn) the, other day asked the Secretary for Scotland whether in making new appointments of technical officers to-the Board of Agriculture the vacancies would be advertised, so that discharged and disabled officers and men with the necessary qualifications for the work should have an opportunity of applying for the post. The reply of the right hon. Gentleman was that ho would do this when practicable. I have made some inquiry, but find there has been no advertisement issued so far, and I do not know whether the right lion. Gentleman intends to advertise, or whether the phrase "where practicable" means that nothing of the kind is ever going to be possible. But in any event it is true-that appointments are being made. The other day a Scottish-Indian who left the country in 1914 and took no part in the War was recalled from India to take up-one of these appointments. It seems tome ridiculous that although we are supposed to make these situations available for discharged men—and there are bound, to be in Scotland hundreds and thousands of men who have come from agricultural districts there—from the Highlands and Islands—and have served brilliantly in the War, and who, therefore, ought to be given a preference wherever possible in every case involving supervision of work:
of this nature in Scotland, I say it does seem to me ridiculous that with so many suitable men available a civilian should be brought back from India to fill the post. These criticisms which I have made might be extended indefinitely, but in view of the shortness of time I do not think it would be fair for any of us to take up much of the time of the Committee; therefore I have curtailed my observations. But I shall be obliged if my right hon. Friend will give answers to the specific questions I have put in regard to what I consider to be not perhaps maladministration but certainly bad administration on the part of the Scottish Board of Agriculture.

6.0 P.M.

Mr. STURROCK: I should like to pre face what I have to say in regard to the Scottish Board of Agriculture by expressing my deep regret that the Scottish Estimates should be taken on a day which is entirely unsuited for the serious consideration of matters affecting the good government and administration of Scotland during present and future years. I do feel, in view of the interruption of the Sitting—for a purpose with which we all sympathise—to enable us to witness the River Pageant—and in view also of the fact that this day is entirely inconvenient for many Scottish Members of Parliament, that it is extremely regrettable, when there are so many serious matters affecting the welfare of our country which need to be carefully and thoroughly debated, we should have been called upon to discuss them under these circumstances. There is another point which I should like to submit to the Secretary for Scotland for his consideration. I know perfectly well we cannot expect an immediate answer to the suggestion just now, but inasmuch as we have a Scottish Standing Committee which is ready at any moment to consider matters affecting Scotland and which is ready during the Session to take up and deal in a satisfactory manner with measures affecting Scotland, surely it could be called together to discuss the Scottish Estimates and subject them to that careful consideration and revision which I am sure they demand. It is a perfectly practical proposal, and although it might not have any precedent to warrant it, yet in these days we are making precedents in every direction, and seeing that the Scottish Standing Committee is representative of every Scottish interest in
the House, without respect to party, we ought to be allowed to take up these Estimates in that Committee and go into them very much more fully than is possible in this House with the limited time at our disposal.
I desire to refer to the Report of the Board of Agriculture especially in regard to the question of small holdings in all parts of the country. I am expressing what I am sure is the general view of the House when I say that amore lamentable document, so far as regards that particular question is concerned, was never presented to Parliament by any responsible body in Scotland. One of the first observations in the Report is that
The Board recognise that on the resumption of inquiries a number of existing applications, many of which are of long standing, would be found to be cancelled by deaths and other causes.
In other words, a great many men who have applied in years past for small holdings have, possibly owing to the War, disappeared from the list of applicants on account of their premature death. I say without hesitation that for every name that is withdrawn by reason of death there are probably ten, twenty, or even fifty withdrawn by reason of disgust, at the dilatory tactics pursued in securing small holdings. The Board state that
Many of the existing applications are of an urgent character.
They go on to say—it is a very significant thing—that
An increasing tendency on the part of applicants to insist on compliance, with their demands is noticeable, and though the applicants have for the most part realised the necessity for patience, threats of forcible seizure are becoming more numerous and have in a few cases been put in force.
That represents the most damning indictment of the policy of dilatoriness one could well imagine. As one who stands for constitutionalism and Parliamentary action. I think that where these men have had the promise held out to them year after year of being settled on the land with their own holdings and nothing is done by the Board—I shall deal later with the reason why the Board does nothing—if ever there was an excuse for direct action, it exists in the case of these men, whose reasonable hopes have all been disappointed time and again. The Board go on to remark that whenever a farm has been taken for small holdings a number of new applications immediately follow. That is very natural and clearly understandable. Many of the people who want small holdings will not trouble to
apply for them because they do not believe they will ever get them. But men who are living in an. area where a farm is taken over for the purpose of creating small holdings naturally make a demand when they believe they are going to have their ambitions satisfied. I should like to allude to the question of the difficulties which have arisen in the Lewis on account of the action of the individual who has purchased that island. I ask the attention of the House to a paragraph in which the Board complains that Lord Leverhulme has intimated to the Board that, anxious as the Board is to secure land for small holdings in the Lewis, Lord Leverhulme—so says the report—
intimated that he had in view the projection of other schemes for the development of industries and the improvement of transport facilities in the island, and considered that these would be more effective in solving the economic difficulties of Lewis than the constitution of smallholdings under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Acts.
The Board thereupon represented to him that their plans did not conflict with the no doubt excellent projects he had in hand, but apparently the Board felt that they had no satisfaction whatever in the matter. I wish to remind the House, without disparaging Lord Leverhulme. who may have the most excellent intentions in regard to the Lewis, that the principle at stake in this paragraph of the Report of the Board of Agriculture is one which I sincerely trust every Scottish Member here will fight, for it amounts to this, that Lord Leverhulme, at the very moment when we have emerged from the greatest War in history in the interests of liberty, is taking upon himself to tell these people, who have historic and sentimental associations with the Lewis, that their future lives are to be guided along the lines laid down, not by themselves, not in accordance with the traditions of their ancestors, but according to the dictates of a successful soap-boiler who has happened to buy up that island The point at issue is a very serious one. We all desire to see the success of the island achieved on any lines considered practicable by Lord Leverhulme or any other body, but when it comes to this, that we are going to replace the tyranny of the Prussian Kaiser by the attempted tyranny on a minute scale in a small island of a man who, through his own commercial success, has beén able to acquire that island, there is a point of principle involved which every Member of this House must fight and
fight to the death. Let Lord Leverhulrm do what he wishes in the way of developing the prosperity of the Lewis, but leave the people of that island, if they do wish to enjoy small holdings there, free altogether from his own proposals. I cannot for the life of me see why any man who wishes to live a life on the land should be compelled under the dictates of Lord Leverhulme or any other body to engage in canning, fish-curing, or any other industry which may be established. The whole Report of the Board of Agriculture in relation to small holdings calls for the immediate consideration of the House of Commons. In their general observations the Board go on to say that they
think it well at this stage to place on record their considered opinion (a) that the demand for small holdings continues to be real and pressing—
which everybody knew before—
(b) That successful small holdings can be established in all parts of Scotland on soils and under agricultural conditions of the most varied character; and (c) that the holdings which already established have been justified by the results from the point of view of the individual holder, the increased production of food and the greater number of people who obtain a living from the land.
Then they remark
Even under a greatly accelerated procedure, it will take many years to exhaust either the demand or the land available.
The next point is the main one for the House to consider. They further lay down that the powers presently in existence are entirely inadequate for the purposes they have in view. The responsible leaders of opinion in the country have, during the whole course of the "War, held out the rosiest hopes to the men who came forward to serve their country during these past years that they are going to be settled on the land under advantageous and favourable conditions. This Report, coming on the back of what has been said in that direction, is truly a lamentable document. I trust that the House, and especially this Government, which is committed to a very wide and comprehensive programme of reconstruction, will take into early consideration the clamant need that exists in Scotland for small holdings on a much more extensive scale than appears to be possible according to the Board of Agriculture under existing legislation.

Mr. HARRY HOPE: The year 1918 has been one which has provided the Department with a wide field of useful activity. When we come to read this Report and to think of the important part the Board have
played in increasing the supply of home grown foodstuffs in Scotland during 1918, we are bound to recognise that it did a good and useful work. We know that through the agency, and with the assistance of the county agricultural committees, assistance was given to farmers which enabled them enormously to increase the supply of home-grown foodstuffs. Not only did we get something like an increase of 240,000 acres in the acreage under cultivation but. we got a very large proportion of the increase which was recommended carried cut. That shows that the farmers, of Scotland backed up the efforts of the Board of Agriculture in this direction. When we see what the Board did in supplying farmers with increased supplies of fertilisers, we must recognise that it did good work in that direction, for without an adequate supply of fertilisers it would have been impossible for us to secure the maximum production from the soil. In enabling sulphate of ammonia and super phosphates to be obtained the Board did good work. In this year, when we see the cost of everything increasing so enormously every day, it would be well for the Board of Agriculture to continue to enable farmers to obtain sulphate of ammonia at a reasonable price as they did in 1918. As regards feeding-stuffs, the Ministry winch took over the charge of that branch of the work, arid no doubt the Board of Agriculture did all that they could to enable them to be obtained at reasonable prices, but ur doubtedly, owing to a large export, there was caused to a great extent a rise in the price of feeding-stuffs. I hope the Board of Agriculture will bring more effective pressure on the Ministry of Food and endeavour to get feeding-stuffs brought down to a more moderate level. As regards the supply of milk, we know what great difficulties existed during the year under review, and we cannot but recognise that the Board of Agriculture did what it could for the farmers. The War Office demands had to be met. I do not think anyone, even amongst the agriculturists in Scotland, desired to see the War Office requirements starved, and I am quite sure the farmers of Scotland recognise that the Boards backed them up as far as they could reasonably hope to be backed up. The Estimates show what an enormous sum is being asked. For this current year £345,000 is being asked—an increase of £265,000. That shows a position which demands very careful considera
tion. In all directions there are openings for increased expenditure, but there is bound to be an end of spending money in all directions, and we want to see all Government Departments taking a lead in exercising economy.
As regards the creation of small holdings in Lewis, a very abnormal state of affairs exists. The people are so attached to the soil that we have small holdings so small that they are not economically sound, and yet they are subdivided up amongst cottars and crofters. That creates a very difficult position because there is only a moderate amount of land available, but I think these cottars and crofters in Lewis, by the magnificent response which they have made to the national cause, deserve exceptional and special treatment, and though I have a great appreciation of the patriotic efforts which Lord Leverhulme is trying to carry out up there, yet I should like to see that attachment to the soil which the Lewis man has not altogether sat upon. I should rather like to see it sympathetically treated, and if possible land given to them. I quite agree that perhaps their future would be much better if they took up industrial and other work, but. yet the attachment of these people to the land is so great and, after all, everyone knows his own business best—and their war record is so good that I think the House ought to treat them sympathetically. I have heard very great doubts cast upon some of the projects which the Board have in view. I have heard that on a large farm in Ross-shire, which I think has something like sixteen cottages on it, the probability is that by being sub-divided up into small holdings there will not only be fewer people living and brought up upon the holdings, but there will be a far smaller amount of foodstuff produced. I have been told that by practical people knowing the district. If there is anything in it I hope the Board of Agriculture will not make small holdings merely to satisfy the cry for small holdings. We want every district considered on its merits, and, after all, the variation of conditions is great, and the habits of the people differ completely in one part of Scotland from another. In some parts their whole ambition is to get small holdings, in others it is to get a higher wage. Therefore it is not enough for the Board in after years to say, "We have boon successful, we have created so many small holdings on paper," when, by
that means, they will never be a success. They need to consider the wants of the people in each district, and if they do that in a practical and sympathetic manner we shall achieve far more success than if they merely come to the House and say, "We have been successful, because all over Scotland we have numerically increased the number of small holdings to such and such an extent." As regards the action of the Board generally, we may consider that during the War it played its part well in increasing the supply of home foodstuffs.

Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAY: The House is conducting this discussion under some difficulty, and I should like to join in the protest which has been made as to the occasion, which has been chosen for the Debate. Nothing, perhaps, is to be gained by making a protest, but I hope the Government will in the next and succeeding years see, if they are still in power, that the same sort of thing does not happen again. I think it only right that the House should congratulate the Board of Agriculture for Scotland upon the work it has accomplished during the struggle from which we have just emerged. There are certain matters in which it has not been able to make that progress which the majority of us could have desired, but I think we ought to take note of the efforts that the Board has made to cope with the work with which it was entrusted during the War, particularly in view of the fact that a very large number of its officials were released for service, and did most admirable work during the contest. There are a large number of applicants for small holdings, but a comparatively small number have been satisfied. If the figures in the Report are accurate, out of 6,471 applicants for new holdings only 596 have obtained them, and out of 4,254 applications for enlargements only 433 have been satisfied. That is a deplorable state of affairs. I agree that it is due not to the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, but to the powers that they lack and the. defects in the Small Landholders, Scotland Bill, which I hope will be rectified by the Land Settlement Bill which the right hon. Gentleman said he would introduce shortly. Another item in the Report refers to the valuable assistance given in the matter of land settlement in this and previous years by the Land Banks connected with the Scottish Smallholders Association.
Reference has been made in previous Reports to the valuable assistance given to the Board by the Scottish Central Land Bank, and I would urge upon the Secretary for Scotland that in the schemes which he proposes to introduce he should employ the assistance and the experience of that particular bank in order to assist the smallholders throughout Scotland financially.
I pass on to that part of the Report which deals with the Agricultural Costings Committee. It is a most valuable Department, and I hope the Board of Agriculture and the Secretary for Scotland will do everything that lies in their power to obtain the co-operation of tenant farmers and Scottish agriculturists generally in the agricultural costings schemes. If they do so, I feel sure it will produce in a short time very beneficial results for agriculture in Scotland. I have addressed questions to my right hon. Friend on more than one-occasion with regard to the proposed Council for Agriculture, Will he in his reply tell us exactly what is the position with regard to the Council? I have urged upon him that he should ensure a proper representation for smallholders on it. I do not know why lie departed from the recommendations made by the Agricultural Policy Sub-committee of the Reconstruction Committee. If that Report had been adopted, the Council would have been elected on the Irish model. I presume it is now too late to go back upon the method of setting up the Council, but I would urge upon my right hon. Friend that he should ensure proper representation for smallholders, who are growing in numbers and in agricultural importance. There is another matter to which I would like to call attention, and that is the Royal Commission on Agriculture for Scotland. I doubt whether any hon. Member could rise in his place to-night and affirm that the representation on that Commission in respect of Scotland has given satisfaction to Scottish agriculturists. I feel perfectly certain that it has not. Again, it is too late to make any change in the Commission, but if the Scottish Estimates had been taken in the Scottish Standing Committee attention might have been drawn to that particular matter, and the representation on the Commission might have been more satisfactory for Scotland than it is.

Major W. MURRAY: In rising for the first time as a new Member to address the House, I would ask for the indulgence of
hon. Members. Notwithstanding all that has been said on the subject, I should like to say a few words upon the main, line of administrative policy which seems to actuate the Board of Agriculture in relation to small holdings, and their discouragement. We can. hardly congratulate the Board, however excellent their other work may have been, upon the number of small holdings that have been set up or the number of purchases they have made. I do not quite understand the figures which were read out by the hon. Member for Kincardineshire. So far as I can make out from the report of the Board during the year, the Board have only created eleven small holdings in addition to those that were there before, and only four purchases of blocks of land have been made. With regard to these purchases some reference has been made to the estate of Midlocharwoods. I entirely agree with the criticisms which. have been made on that subject by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh. The only excuse for purchasing it was because there were a large number of very good buildings upon it which might be taken over for training men for small holdings, but for soldiers who intended to settle upon the land and as a permanent residence for smallholders, considering its distance from all the railways and towns, it was an inadequate and an unwise purchase. These are not good results for a year in the matter of small holdings. A good many difficulties stand in the way, and some of these difficulties are certainly due to Acts which have been recently passed by this House. In particular I would refer to the provision of the 1918 Act, which was referred to by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh, which makes it a condition that three-fourths of the land purchased for small holdings shall be capable of cultivation. That proviso has done a great deal of harm. As the Board themselves say in their Report, it has ruled out practically the whole of the Highland counties. I know of one very excellent scheme in which small holdings, forestry, and rural industries were to be combined, and this very good scheme was to be established near a town and near a railway; but it was ruled out by the provision in question. That provision really makes the combination of agricultural holdings and forestry impossible, because if the State is going to purchase land for forestry it must do it in very large quantities, over
large areas of' land, or else it will not be worth its while to purchase land at all.
I particularly wish to consider the main line of policy which has been laid down by the Hoard. The Board say:
To ensure economical management and for other reasons the Board were of opinion that blocks of land of considerable extent should be acquired, save in exceptional cusses. Difficulty has been experienced in seeming such, areas embracing land of suitable character.
I differ entirely from that view. If their policy is going to be to provide big blocks of land of 1,000 to 3,000 acres, say one or two per county, they will never resettle the Scottish people or the ex-soldiers on Scottish land. The idea appears to me to smack of bureaucracy. It is putting the question of management and the wishes and convenience of the Board before the wishes and convenience and the natural desire of the ex-soldiers or ploughmen who may desire to settle on the land. It is not what the ex-soldier wants, it is not what the ploughman wants, and I do not think it is what the people of Scotland expect. The soldier comes back to this country, and he expects to settle somewhere near his own folk. It is natural that he should want to do that, and he Las a right to expect it, but the Board instead only offer such a man a place in some big settlement of small holdings which may be twenty, fifty, or 100 miles away from his native village. I would ask hon. Members to put themselves in the position of that ex-soldier who comes home hoping to get a small holding, and he has an offer of this kind made to him. If I were in his place I should be inclined to refuse it, and I think a good many hon. Members would have the same view of the matter.
The policy of the Board seems to me to entirely ignore all the social reasons for small holdings. Many of us will remember that some years ago when this matter was much debated, the social reasons for small holdings appeared to be quite as strong if not stronger than either the agricultural reasons or economic reasons. Groups of small holdings in a parish lead to contentment. They lead to a knowledge of the land among a greater number of people than those who possessed that knowledge before, and they lead to an understanding of the land and of the land question. All these make for good. I would like to see quite a different form of policy. I would like to see small holdings, if possible, established in groups in or near the majority of rural parishes in Scotland, and I am persuaded that if the Board made
that part of their policy, land for such purposes would be very readily forthcoming in many parishes in Scotland. I shall be told at once that that sort of scheme is not practicable. I shall be told that it is too expensive, that it is difficult to manage and so on. My reply to that is two-fold. In the first place, I want to know whether less is going to be done in Scotland to settle people on the land than seems to be possible and practicable under the English Land Acquisition Bill. A policy of numerous groups of small holdings rather than blocks of small holdings is possible in Eagland to-day, and from inquiries I have made in England certain county councils, who are considering the matter, favour the setting up of numerous small groups of small holdings rather than the purchase of huge blocks of land. That is much the better idea of the two, and if it is practicable in England it ought to be practicable in Scotland, find I hope that steps will be taken towards that end.
Finally, I should like to say a few words on the question of management and inspection. In my view small holdings do not require much management or much inspection. I have known groups of small holdings set up under the 1911 Act, and I do not think they were ever inspected. If they had been inspected, there is no material result from that inspection. We give these men security of tenure and set them up in the best way possible. We should, after that, leave them alone. A man does not want his home inspected, and particularly he does not want his farming transactions overlooked by some official. He is likely to live a far happier and probably a more prosperous life if he. is left alone and left as far as possible to work out his own salvation. Whatever may be the result of this policy of big blocks of small holdings, I am certain that it is not a policy that will satisfy either the ploughman, the ex-soldier, or the people of Scotland.

Sir G. YOUNGER: I congratulate my hon. and gallant Friend upon the speech to which we have just listened, and I express the hope that we may often hear him, especially in our Scottish Debates, because I am sure he can give us valuable advice. I do not think the complaints against the Board of Agriculture to-day have been justified. I have never been a great admirer of the Board of Agriculture. I have criticised them every year since they were created, but I feel less
inclined to criticise them this year than ever, but I do think, from reading the Report very carefully, that they have done excellent work. It seems to be forgotten by many who complain about the lack of activity in the settlement of small holdings that we have had four years of war, during which it has been impossible to do anything of the kind. The Grants for special purposes including those things have been withheld for the last two or three years. The cost of building and fencing has risen enormously, and, apart from that, there was no labour to do the work. It is very unfair in such circumstances that attacks should be. made upon the Board for things for which they were in no way responsible. It is no business of mind to defend them. Xo doubt the Secretary for Scotland will do that, but, having criticised them before, it is only fair to express these views now.
So far as the Board is concerned with the question of the Lewis and other places, I cannot help thinking that the remarks of the hon. Member for Montrose Burghs (Mr. Sturrock) were not in the happiest of taste. The Lewis has always been a difficult problem, and is at present a difficult problem. A long time ago, when Sir James Mathieson acquired the island, he spent £400,000 or £500,000 in reclaiming a large part of the island, but the scheme was a disastrous failure. It was a well-intentioned scheme to provide small holdings for the cottars who were there, but I have been told that the land which was reclaimed is really in a worse condition now than it was before the money was spent. The proposals for the present development of the island which Lord Leverhulme is trying to carry out, from what T read in the newspapers, is of very much more practical character, and proposing things such as fish-curing stations seems to be the best way of developing the island. But, whatever Lord Leverhulme's views may be. I do not think that he is a man who would stand against the Board if they desired to establish a certain number of these holdings. They have now the power to do so, if they wish, and no doubt will exercise it if they think fit.

Mr. STURROCK: The Board are obviously, in one paragraph, against Lord Leverhulme.

Sir G. YOUNGER: It does not say for a single moment that Lord Leverhulme absolutely refused to give land, and I do-not think he did so.

Mr. STURROCK: I never said so.

Sir G. YOUNGER: The hon. Gentleman suggested that Lord Leverhulme set himself against the Board in the matter and intended to develop schemes of his own against theirs. This does not say so. He expressed these views, on the subject. He thought the other was the better way of developing the island, but I never heard that he refused to give land for the purpose. I wish now to ask a question about the forest of Inverailort, which was taken over by the Board of Agriculture in 1917 for the purpose of a sheep farm, and, as they said, for increasing the productivity of food supplies. Last year, when a question was put by Colonel Stirling, who was then a Member of this House, I myself asked in June what the result of that action had been. My information has been that it has been disastrous. As was anticipated before the Board entered into possession of the land, the number of deaths of sheep put upon it was as great as it was many years before when the same attempt was made, so that, so far from increasing the food supply, the deer were driven off and a large quantity of sheep provided during the strenuous times of the War have been lost. The right hon. Gentleman promised me two months ago that he was having a full report of the circumstances and would communicate with me when he received it. He has not done so; but, if he has received the information, probably he will be able to give it to me now. The answer which I received was somewhat misleading. I rather think that the right hon. Gentleman mixed up two things. I wanted to know what the result of the count had been in 1918 and in the July of this year. He did not give me that, but he gave me the number of sheep on the land. That is all very well, but a considerable number have been put on the land again, and if those were included in the count that he gave me, that does not furnish an answer at all. I want to know what the death-rate has been, and whether the experiment has been a failure or not, and I will be glad to have an answer?

Dr. MURRAY: Representing, as I do, perhaps the biggest crofting constituency in the Kingdom, before coming to the main part of the work of the Board, I may first say a word or two about the condition of the parish pump—the small things that the Board of Agriculture have to deal with in the various parts of the Highlands.
After all, the protection of the parish pump, is of great importance. I am not going to join in the criticism of the Board of Agriculture with regard to the operations during the War. I -acknowledge that in certain directions I should have liked to see more work done, but I admit that the War, which has covered a multitude of sins, has been a valid excuse for neglect in certain directions. But, now that the winter of our discontent is past, I see some sign of returning life in the Board of Agriculture. If I were to look at this Report alone as showing the works and intentions of the Board of Agriculture, it would certainly be a very hopeless outlook, but I know from activities in recent months that the Board have got into their stride again, and I believe that in the near future they will be able to show that the criticism levelled against them for activities in certain directions during the War were not, perhaps, too well founded. There are many matters with which I would like them to deal that have not been attended to before. There are certain activities in which the Board used to engage in what is called officially the congested area in the Highlands. Among these were the question of roads, piers and harbours, crofters' houses, the fencing of crofting villages, and other matters of that sort. All these activities have been practically suspended during the War, but I do hope, with regard to the roads, that the Board will resume their activities very soon. Dwellers in towns, even those accustomed to their own rural parts, cannot understand the difficulties which large numbers of people in the Highlands and Islands have to put up with owing to the want of roads. Many times during the winter, when storms prevail and snow lies deep on. the ground, villages are cut off from receiving necessary supplies because of the want of roads. I am glad to acknowledge that the Secretary for Scotland, in connection with a road which I brought under his attention in the early part of the year, has seen that the Board of Agriculture have already taken the matter up.
7.0 P.M.
I may now draw attention to one or two other roads which are very much needed and might occupy the immediate attention of the Board of Agriculture, if the people of these places are to live in a better way than they did before the War, as they were promised they would. There is, for instance, in Lewis the road to Aird Uig joining up the village with the
main road, and also the village of Crow-lista with the main road. Further south in Harris a road is required from Avan-suidh to Huisinish, in order to help the people of the Island of Scarp, where they are very badly off. In the Island of Scarp, which has a fairly large population, they are faced with great difficulties. No doubt my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness (Mr. Mori son) is glad to escape electioneering difficulties in future years in this island, which is now cut off from its constituency because of the difficulties of communication. They have first to cross a ferry, then before they get to a road they have to travel across five miles of moor track. The Secretary for Scotland or the Board might well spend a couple of hundred pounds in bringing the people who live in this island in touch with outer civilisation. Another road to join up the village of Marag with the main road is very much required. Another important matter is the question of piers. We have heard a great deal about the occupations of the people of the Western Isles. One of their main occupations is that of fishing. They cannot prosecute their fishing very well without piers on which to land their fish. I hope the Board of Agriculture will renew their activities in this direction and erect very much needed piers at various points on the coast. In passing, I should say that Lord Leverhulme—I must say this for him—has helped largely, and is helping now, in improving the roads. He is making one or two excellent roads from which he cannot possibly gain any pecuniary advantage at once. I want to be fair to him. But he cannot do everything. We must look to the Board of Agriculture. We sometimes used to get a Secretary for Scotland to go up to these parts. Now we have an Under-Secretary, and I understand he is going to follow Dr. Johnson in a tour of the Hebrides. I hope, however, that he is not of the same critical weight as Dr. Johnson. I can promise him that in places he will have considerable difficulty in climbing up the rocks. The Board of Agriculture has been doing pretty well in the direction of providing piers. I want to make one criticism. The Congested Districts Board, which preceded the Board of Agriculture, seemed to adopt the policy with regard to piers that when they found people who wanted a pier they gave it to them, something to look at which was of no use whatever, whereas an extra ex-
penditure of £300 or £400 would have made it a thing, not perhaps of beauty but of considerable usefulness. At present most of the piers erected by the Congested Districts Board are absolutely useless. I hope there will be a re-survey of all those piers, so that by an addition here and there they may be made of some use. to the people. Other piers are very much needed, for instance, for the congested fishing population at the Butt of Lewis, where we got the first word of Hawker's safety. A great quantity of fish used to be landed at the harbour, but it is useless because of a breakdown some years ago. I hope the Board will see that the harbour at the port of Ness is repaired and made useful to the large number of splendid fishermen we have there. There are other harbours needed, but I will send details to the Secretary for Scotland and not mention them now.
I come next to deal for a short time with the most important question in connection with the Western Isles, as it is the most important question for the Highlands generally, and that is the question of small holdings. I was very much interested in the references made by other hon. Members to the condition of things in the Western Isles. Here, again, I have to acknowledge that, since the Armistice, the Board of Agriculture have been showing a commendable diligence In securing land for small holdings in various parts of the Highlands and even in the islands. The first time I addressed this House I brought two things to the attention of the Secretary for Scotland—the case of Barra and the case of South Uist. I am glad that a large farm has been bought in the island of Barra. In the two areas I have to acknowledge with gratitude that the Secretary for Scotland and the Board have been doing some good work. I am very glad to acknowledge also that landlords in the Highlands generally have shown themselves agreeable to the formation of small holdings on their estates. Indeed, one of the. strongest resolutions in favour of granting small holdings in the Highlands has come to me from a Committee over which Lord Lovat, one of our biggest landlords, presided. It is very pleasing to see that the old Highland lairds have come round to the idea that after all men are better than sheep, and better even than deer. Small holdings are a big asset to the country. The late War has proved to us that the more
people we have on the land the better for the country, whether in peace or in war, and especially in war. In my own Constituency during the first week of the War, on a journey through the whole Island of Lewis, it would have been hardly possible to find a man capable of bearing arms. They were all away at the War, and the women were tilling the soil, cutting the peats and keeping the home fires burning. I think that men of that sort when they come back, even if they are wrong in demanding small holdings, deserve a little consideration. They bought their freedom at a great price, and I think that even if great commercial magnates think that some other schema is better for them, a little self-determination after all is a good thing. Their blood will be upon their own heads it the thing fails. An hon. Member spoke about the sentiment of these people and their attachment to the soil. I quite agree there is some sentiment. What brought men home from Canada and Australia and New Zealand? Sentiment. When they saw the country in danger they came across to fight for it. We are not such a simple people as we look. It is said that the people are unwilling to leave those parts and prefer to stick to their poverty and misery because they do not know any better. They do know better. The great bulk of the population of these islands, male and female, has been for years going round the coast of Great Britain. They have visited Wick and Aberdeen and Yarmouth, and have been to Ireland. They have seen industrialism. They know what their own life is, and they have sufficient common sense to know what is best for them. I hope that industrialism as we find it today is not the last word in the expression of social life. I look at Liverpool and Yorkshire. I see nothing but chaos. I look at Lewis. In comparison it is a perfect Garden of Eden.
I do not see why Lewis, of all places, should be singled out as the only place where the landlord is unwilling to grant smallholdings. He has expressed his unwillingness. I want to be fair to Lord Leverhulme. He said that he has a better plan for the people of. Lewis. Through interviews and in other ways he impresses his views on the country as a whole, and you get a picture of Lord Leverhulme coming with a great flow of capital to Lewis, willing to develop great industrial schemes, and of the simple people there being against them. It is nothing of the
kind. I have hardly heard one word of criticism, against Lord Leverhulme's schemed. There is room in Lewis for other things besides industrialism. The difficulty is that Lord Leverhulme is not willing to break" up any of the farms in Lewis in order to grant small holdings there. I agree that Lord Leverhulme's motives are the very best. He wants to improve the country. I believe that his schemes will do a great deal of good. In j public and private I have always admitted that. I believe that hundreds and thousands of the people of Lewis will come in and willingly work Lord Leverhulme's schemes. What I do object to in Lord Leverhulme is that he has come there, no doubt with a mind developed under somewhat different conditions, under commercial and industrial conditions, and he cannot see that any other kind of life is worth living, except in a model town with nicely built cottages, curtained windows, and a picture. I do not object to that sort of life either, and I would be the last person in the world to prevent a man going into industrialism of that sort. His lordship thinks that the life of the people of Lewis is a very hard life, and a squalid life. It is nothing of the kind.
Their life in Lewis is as high a life as in a city, say, like Liverpool, and it is not such a poverty-stricken life. The people do not live in the lap of luxury, yet I never saw any abject poverty there, and I never knew of a death from starvation or of illness which could be attributed to deficiency in food. During the War there was no place where the people wore generally better off than in Lewis. That shows the value of life as distinct from its industrial side, and that value is an asset to the whole country. What I object to in Lord Leverhulme is that he is not willing to divide any of these farms into, holdings for those who want them, whether they are returned sailors or returned soldiers, or those who lost their breadwinners in the War. In the Island of Lewis there are 800 applications for small holdings, and those have been before the Board of Agriculture for seven or eight years, and not one of them has yet been done, and that in Lewis of all places in the country. I say it is a shame. I do not care what Lord Leverhulme's aims may be, and they are of the highest, I know, but I do think that the Government and the Board of Agriculture must recognise that a great portion of the people in Lewis want to live the old life of liberty, and do not want to go into
mills or factories and work, say, from 5 o'clock in the morning until some hour in the evening. They want their liberty to earn their living in their own way as they have hitherto done. An hon. Member referred to the fact that these were not economic holdings. I quite admit, but the mistake people make is to look at the people of Lewis as merely crofters. They are men who want to live their life in their own way; they are crofters and fishermen, or in a word, they are amphibious. Most of them do not want more than three acres. What they really desire is a home and a homestead to use as a vehicle from which they can make their living on the land and round their own coast and other people's coasts. That is the basic fact which should be kept in mind when we are discussing the people of the Western Isles, and especially Lewis and Harris.
Lord Leverhulme gives one or two reasons for not dividing up the farms. He says that there is not enough to go round, and that while there are 800 applicants the farms are only capable of being turned into 200 holdings. I do not admit those figures, and I say that there is land capable of far more small holdings than that number. But even if the numbers are correct that is no argument against giving what there is. Let the matter be decided by the casting of lots or by ballot. Nobody pretends that it will solve the problem, but will the settlement of a dock strike settle the industrial problem in the whole of England, or even in Yorkshire? This will settle one aspect of the question, and that is all we claim for it. Another argument that Lord Leverhulme uses is that these farms will be needed for a milk supply for the great Stornoway that is to be built up as a result of a big industrial effort. The farms would be needed for their milk supply for the population immediately surrounding them, so that that argument does not hold water. This is the question in which I am most immediately concerned. I am very sorry that this difference has arisen with Lord Leverhulme, because I have already acknowledged, and I hope I have said nothing in disparagement of Lord Leverhulme's efforts, that he has a perfect right to his opinions, and equally I maintain, we have a perfect right to ours. A curious thing is that when I was a simple rustic up in Lewis I saw a report of a meeting in London of Coalition Liberals at which the Prime Minister presided, and
there was a programme submitted there in which small holdings formed a very prominent and strong part. The seconder of the motion on that subject was Lord Leverhulme and it is very strange when he had a chance of applying the policy which he helped to launch on the country on the eve of the General Election that he should have forgotten it immediately the election was over. I hope that the Government are going to remember that this is their policy. There have been suggestions in the Press that if the people of Lewis persist in demanding these small holdings, and if the Government persist in dividing these farms, that Lord Leverhulme may wash his hands of these schemes. I say that that is a very cruel alternative, and I do not see any reason for antagonism between the policy of dividing the farms and the highest development of Lord Leverhulme's industrial schemes. When I see suggestions that because of the stiff-necked politician he met in Lewis and the stiff-necked Board of Agriculture in insisting on cutting up his farms that he may wash his hands of the whole thing, I say that one thing has no necessary connection with the other. It would be just as likely for the Minister of Health to say that he would have no housing scheme for London unless all the population wore kilts instead of trousers. I hope that the Board of Agriculture will respond to the reasonable demands of these men. They have taken some part of the farms. I do not praise them for doing so, but I am not going to blame them for it. They were taught the lesson that that is the only way of getting anything done. I think that these men should be allowed a certain amount of liberty in selecting their own way of living. This demand for land which industrial people cannot understand is bred in their bones. Some people, for instance, cannot understand why Ireland, which was never so prosperous, is so strong in its demand for self-government. Lord Leverhulme cannot understand the aspirations of these people to get land, and I hope that the Board of Agriculture will give them that land, if necessary, by compulsion.

Mr. MUNRO: I hope the House will allow me to express my regret if the fact that this day has been devoted to Scottish Estimates has been found to be inconvenient by any of my hon. Friends from Scotland. It is the day of the Pageant, and a Bank Holiday, and it is also a memorable day in the history of Great Britain, namely, the 4th of August. But we
have had a Debate, in spite of any circumstances of embarrassment which may have arisen from the facts to which I have referred, which I venture to think has been useful and has been conducted on a, high level. In that connection I would like to join with what was said by one of my hon. Friends in congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Major W. Murray) upon the maiden speech which he has delivered. I can assure him I listened to it with the greatest possible care, and the views of policy which he enunciated so clearly and definitely will be very carefully borne in mind in connection with the future policy or the Board of Agriculture. I have no sensational story to tell the House of the Board. It is a record of unremitting industry and conscientious work, done, as I think the House recognises, under very difficult and discouraging circumstances, because we are here dealing with a Report that covers the year 1918, one of the years of the War. The work of the Board has been, roughly speaking, divided into two parts, as have been the speeches of hon. Members. There is, first of all, the agricultural side pure and simple, and secondly, the question of land settlement, which bulked more largely in the speeches of hon. Members than any other topic and which was naturally the most important subject to deal with at present. On the question of agriculture, may I mention one or two things in order to show that the Board has made the best use of the opportunities afforded to it? First of all, with regard to education and research. There is no part of the work in agriculture which is more important than that which is directed to those two topics. The attendance of students at the agricultural colleges in Scotland diminished, of course, under war conditions, but there has been a marked increase in the number of those students since the cessation of hostilities, and many Colonial and American soldiers have attended the agricultural classes. In fact, the accommodation has been very severely taxed. Now it is proposed to extend the work of those colleges in the future, and a Grant of £45,000 per year for five years has been made by the Treasury for the extension of agricultural education and research in Scotland. I have no doubt at all that comprehensive schemes of research into the prevalent diseases of the more important animals in agriculture and into the improved methods of plant-breeding which are now in contemplation will
benefit to a very large extent by this Grant which I am glad to be able to announce to the House.
Another feature of the Board's work in connection with agriculture has been that to which reference was made by my hon. Friend the Member for Stirlingshire and Clackmannan, namely, the increased cultivation of land. I desire, in passing, to acknowledge the kindly and complimentary manner in which my hon. and gallant Friend referred to the Board's work in this regard. As the House knows, the submarine menace created a dangerous food situation in Scotland and elsewhere, and the Board appealed to the Scottish fanners to increase their cultivation in 1918 far above that which they had accomplished in 1916. Despite the great shortage in labour, which interfered with and hampered the Board's efforts as well as those of the farmers, no fewer than 241,300 additional acres were placed under the plough in 1918 as compared with 1916. That, I venture to think, was a very creditable achievement on the part of the farmers of Scotland at a very difficult time. They served the country well. The Board has assisted in cultivation by providing motor tractors, ploughs, cultivators, binders, and so on, and, by means of these various appliances, 24,000 acres were ploughed, 3,600 wore cultivated, 5,700 were grubbed, 5,500 were harrowed, and 7,000 were harvested. These were the necessary occupations to which the Board had to devote itself in time of war, working in close alliance and harmony with the farmers of Scotland. My hon. and gallant Friend behind me referred also to the work the Board had done in connection with the provision of fertilisers. Such crops could not have been produced nor reaped were it not for the arrangements which the Board was able to make in connection with these fertilisers. I shall bear in mind what the hon. Member said, speaking I know from very full knowledge and experience, regarding the question of feeding-stuffs. That, no doubt, is as important in its own way as the question of fertilisers, and it will occupy the Board's attention in the future as it has done in the past.
The labour difficulty, as he reminded the House, was very acute. One had to endeavour to square the circle, so to speak, satisfy the Army requirements which the safety of the country demanded, and on the other hand produce food at home, which in a certain measure, it not equally,
the safety of the country also demanded. That was one of the principal tasks of the Board in connection with increased cultivation. In most cases the increased cultivation was achieved voluntarily by the farmers of Scotland, and I say this, speaking as a Scotsman, with some little legitimate pride. I mean that in comparatively few cases had compulsory orders under the Defence of the Realm Act to be issued in Scotland, Scottish farmers regarding it as the performance of a patriotic duty that they should place their land under cultivation and take the risk of any loss which might ensue and which, in some cases, did ensue. Then I desire to say a few words in answer to the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine (Lieut.-Colonel A. Murray) regarding the agricultural committees to which he referred. Agricultural committees were started, I think I am right in saying, in 1915, in practically every county in Scotland for the purpose of stimulating food production, and they were organised by the Board. Agricultural executive committees, smaller bodies, were set up by these agricultural committees in the year 1917, and they did extraordinarily good work. It was thought, therefore, that they should be put upon a more formal basis and have a permanent place in the agricultural administration of the country, and accordingly a scheme for reconstructing these committees were devised and promulgated. That scheme—I can describe it to the House very briefly—was of this nature. In the first place, an electoral body of twenty-four members is being formed in each county in Scotland. Twelve of these are nominated by the county council, four by each of the main agricultural societies in Scotland—that is to say, the Highland. the Chamber of Agriculture, and the National Farmers' Union. These electoral bodies appoint executive committees of not fewer than ten and not more than a specified number, which is twenty in the larger counties in Scotland, and the Secretary for Scotland nominates to each of these committees, after consultation with associations of farm workers, two members to represent farm servants upon these committees. These executive committees in turn elect members to serve on what is called the Scottish Council of Agriculture, to which my hon. and gallant Friend referred. Each county has not fewer than two representatives on that council, and twenty members in addition are to be
nominated by the Secretary for Scotland. I feel sure that smallholders will almost certainly be elected to serve upon the National Council. That, I think, will almost certainly be the case, but if they should not be elected, then I shall make it my business to see that among the representatives whom, in virtue of my office, I am entitled to nominate, their interests will be duly represented. Of that National Council, a still smaller body is to be formed, namely, an advisory committee, of nine members who are elected, along with three nominated by the Secretary for Scotland, and their functions are to advise the Board on any matter referred to it by the Board or by the council. So much for the machinery of these agricultural councils.
I should like to say a word of approbation, and of gratitude also, to the district wages committees and the Central Wages Committee in Scotland, whose tenure of office is, under Act of Parliament, until the 31st December of this year, and who have already practically finished their task. It has been a very excellent piece of work, if I may say so—difficult work, and very fruitful work—and deserves, I think, the full acknowledgment of all who are interested in these matters. May I say in passing also that it is proposed to-appoint at an early date two Committees to inquire into matters which are of interest to agriculturists and others—the one is into the stocking of deer forests, a matter of perennial interest, and the other in regard to heather-burning and damage to crops which is done by game. I propose at an early date to set up Committees to investigate these two important matters. I think that is the most convenient course to take, and I know that the Reports which will be presented will be of value and interest to everybody concerned.

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: Will they be in the nature of Departmental Committees?

Mr. MUNRO: I would not like to commit myself absolutely to the kind of Committees, but I hope to make a definite announcement as to the quality of the Committees, and the personnel of the Committees also, as soon as may be. My hon. Friend the Member for the Western Isles (Dr. D Murray) referred to the subject of public works, and welcomed the resuscitation of the Board's activities in.
that regard. He knows quite well that one of the earliest examples of revived activity in that direction was the Grant of £10,000 for the construction of a road in Lewis, which he ho ably represents, and also a Grant of £7,500 has been made for the construction of the Bays of Harris road, with which, I have no doubt, he is also familiar. These Grants are subject to a guarantee of maintenance which is given by the county council in each in stance. There are other smaller public works which I will not delay the House by enumerating, but my hon. Friend is right in saying that that particular side of peace-time activity has not been neglected by the Board at the earliest opportunity after the War. May I say a word with regard to the demobilisation of agriculturists? Some 10,000 men have been applied for as pivotal in agriculture and in allied industries. Of these, 8,800 have, according to my information, been released, and in all the circumstances I venture to think that that is a result on which the Board may reasonably congratulate itself. I do not propose to deal with a great variety of other topics with which the Report deal son the agricultural side, not because they are not important, but because I do not desire to make a long speech, and I want to say a few words before I sit down about land settlement, the other branch of the Board's activities. My hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Hogge) dealt with this subject, and he dealt with three different topics, if I remember right. He first of all asked certain questions as regards the estate of Borgie. The position there is that we have been proceeding under circumstances of extreme difficulty, as my hon. Friend will, I know, be the first to acknowledge, but I would not like it to go forth as my view, because it is not my view, that this estate is a white elephant as he called it, nor that the expenditure upon it has been or will be wasteful. The position is, I hope, that ten holdings will be established upon Borgie at an early date.

Mr. HOGGE: Can he say when?

Mr. MUNRO: I want to guard myself against giving a precise date, but I hope that at an early date we shall have ten holders established there. I cannot give offhand the actual expenditure to date, but I can tell my hon. Friend this, that the farm of Borgie was presented to the
nation through the then Secretary for Scotland by the Duke of Sutherland, and-that during the term of management by the Board there has been a profit on the working of that farm. There has been as great activity as war conditions, have permitted. Expenditure on housing, has taken place of a very much greater amount than was contemplated at first. Houses which at the time when the estimates were taken were to cost £300 have cost nearly double to-day. Fencing. has been done. There has been expenditure on roads and fencing. My hon. Friend asked me about afforestation. According to my information, a nursery for forestry has already been fenced off and prepared for planting, and I hope planting may take place at a reasonably early date. The difficulties with regard to Borgie have arisen from two very obvious circumstances, as my hon. Friend will admit. First of all, there is the difficulty with regard to building. The cost of everything connecter with building has gone up in the most extraordinary way during the War. Timber is between 200 per cent. and 300 per cent. higher than in 1913, cement 100 per cent. higher.

Captain W. BENN: Restricted imports!

Mr. MUNRO: I am not discussing causes, but facts. Iron and wire 400 per cent., lime 100 per cent., labour 100 per cent. also. The difficulties of building under these conditions, as my hon. Friend, who is always fair in his criticism, will recognise, were extreme. The other reason why settlers have not been put upon the estate at an earlier date is partly due to the terms of the gift. Under the terms of the Duke of Sutherland's gift, the selection of men was limited to sailors and soldiers who had seen foreign service and who came from the North. I am not sure I am quoting quite accurately, but, in respect that the men have only been demobilised quite recently, there has not been time or opportunity to make greater progress than has been made.

Mr. HOGGE: Will he tell the House if he has made any estimate of the number of smallholders who can be put on the land?

Mr. MUNRO: I may have an opportunity before the Debate closes, but I cannot answer that question offhand. If I cannot give an answer now, and my hon. Friend will put down a question, I will certainly give him the information. With
regard to the other estate to which he referred, namely, Locharwoods, I want to say there are two properties—Mid Locharwoods and Nether Locharwoods. They are adjacent, and really constitute one property. The acquisition of Mid Locharwoods, as my hon. Friend quite rightly said, was not approved in 1916. The reason, I am told, was largely because of its limited area at that time, but the adjacent farm in the meantime fell vacant, and became available, and the purchase made extended the total area to twice the area available in 1916. I want to add that that particular estate, in the opinion of the Board's technical officers—and that is an opinion on which, of course, I feel bound to proceed—forms a most suitable property for the purpose which we have in mind. I know there may be a difference of opinion on that subject. The objections which were taken by the Dumfries Committee, to which my hon. Friend referred, were very fully heard and very fully considered by the Board at the time. They were based, I am told, upon a complete misapprehension of the requirements of small holdings. The special advantage of this particular property is that the farm was already equipped with dormitories, and it is now being used mainly as a training centre for ex-Service men engaged in poultry-keeping and horticulture, and thirty men, or thereabouts, we hope, will be settled upon that particular property with advantage to themselves.

Mr. HOGGE: Can my right hon. Friend say now that there are thirty men there? Is it not a fact that no men have had technical training?

Mr. MUNRO: As I stated a moment ago, men are being trained on that particular estate in poultry-keeping and in horticulture. That is my information. My hon. Friend has put to me two or three very special cases, and I am giving him the best information I can obtain at short notice. With regard to the next point of my hon. Friend as to the delay which took place in a specified case of a man named Watson, I am told that Watson, a discharged soldier, is a ploughman's son. He has a pension, but, naturally enough, little or no capital, which is not infrequent and not surprising, but I am told he wants a holding near his father's homo if he can get assistance for working and stocking the farm. The Board applied to the Argyll Estate to give him a holding on one
of three farms, held on a single tenancy. The estate did not see their way to make this or any other land available for small holdings. The tenant of one of these farms was also opposed to the proposal. My hon. Friend will appreciate that the cost of compulsory proceedings for the benefit of one man, however meritorious, would really be prohibitive, and I am sure he would not urge it upon us. But I hope an opportunity may yet offer to place that particular applicant upon a small holding, though the fact that his capital is so limited that he desires to obtain his father's help in a holding in the vicinity where he is may make that a little difficult. At the, moment he is employed in a local Post Office. That is all I can tell my lion. Friend about that particular case which he raised—I do not complain at all—without very full notice.
The third point my hon. Friend put was with regard to advertising appointments to posts in the Board of Agriculture. I must tell my hon. Friend there have been very few appointments yet made. I think I am right in saying only two appointments have been made up to date. Several other appointments, I hope, will shortly be sanctioned, but whether it will be possible in each case to advertise or not I am not quite sure. I am not sure that it is desirable; it very often makes for delay. The Board had recently to appoint costing officers, and advertised. They had 700 applications for six posts, and it is very difficult indeed, and does necessarily cause delay when one has to sift a number of applications so large as that. I am not sure I can go beyond what was said in answer to my hon. Friend's question, that, other things being equal, I will endeavour to see that such posts are advertised wherever it is practicable to do so. With regard to the case my hon. Friend mentioned of the Anglo-Indian who was brought home, I agree that is a very special case, and he must not take that as an example of the principles on which the Board works. That was a very special case of a man who was a dairy farmer in Renfrewshire, a distinguished student of the Glasgow Agricultural College and a successful lecturer in the East of Scotland Agricultural College. He was personally known to the Commissioner of Small Holdings as a specially competent man, and, after a short time of soldiering- abroad, he was brought back as being a man of exceptional knowledge and qualifications for the purpose in view.
On the more general question of land settlement, the position is that at the present moment the Board has acquired 154,017 acres as at 31st July this year, and of these 18,059 acres are arable. The acreage to which I refer comprises properties acquired by gift, properties which were purchased under the Small Colonies Acts, properties which were purchased under the Congested Districts Act, and properties which were acquired under the Landholders Act of 1911. The total secured under all those Statutes amount to 154,017 acres. Many schemes, moreover, in addition to these, are under consideration now. There are fifty-two schemes under the Small Holdings (Colonies) Acts, thirty-two under the Congested Districts Act, and 116 under the Small Landholders Act, which are under consideration now. These relate to thousands of acres of land in Argyll, Caithness, Inverness, Sutherland, and other counties in Scotland, but I would ask the House to bear in mind that, as regards much of the land, if not most of the land, which has been acquired by purchase, it is held under lease and, accordingly, one has to wait six or even twelve months before one can get rid of the tenants. In that way there are 5,646 acres which will fall in. at Martinmas, 1919, and 12,451 acres which will fall in on Whitsun day, 1920. I do not want to exaggerate the difficulties, but I want the House to recognise them, and they have been very fairly recognised by a number of hon. Members. But the difficulties of settlement, and, in particular, of erecting buildings, are extremely great at the present moment. The Grant, for example, as my hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh pointed out, was cut down from £185,000 to £10,000 during the years of the War. Fortunately that difficulty has gone, and the Grant has now been restored to the original figure. Then there was a shortage of the Board's staff during war-time. Many members of the staff served most gallantly during the War, and the difficulty of carrying on in the absence of irreplaceable men was very great indeed. Then, again, there was the difficulty with regard to leases to which I have referred. Once you get rid of the lease and obtain possession you have still to put up buildings. Six months is a minimum time, under present conditions, in which you can erect buildings, and when you take into account the shortage of labour and the cost of materials, the House will begin to appreciate the
tremendous difficulty with which the Board has had to contend, and is now contending, in the matter of setting up smallholders upon small holdings, whether it be under the Colonies Acts or otherwise.
Reference was made by one hon. Member to what he called the deplorable dilatoriness of the Board. I would beg him to accept my assurance that there has been no avoidable delay on the part of the Board in this matter. Circumstances have proved too strong for the Board in many cases where they would have liked to establish these settlers at an earlier date. Had my hon. Friend been in my place or a member of the Board, I think he would have reached the same conclusion as that which I have ventured to state. With regard to the settlement actually accomplished as at 30th of June this year, 628 holders were settled in new holdings, 491 were granted enlargements, and of ex-Service men who applied for land as at 30th of June, there were 369 who had been interviewed with regard to their wishes, and 359 out of this number had been favourably reported upon. I have authorised recently the establishment of a bureau for the express purpose of getting the Board into early and close touch with the men who desire to settle upon the land, in order that all possible steps may be taken to meet the reasonable wishes of the respective candidates for that purpose. At the present moment thirty-six ex-Service men have been settled upon the land, six are employed upon farms which are acquired by the Board, and twelve are working upon other farms—fifty-four in all. So far as I can judge—and the House will recognise the difficulty of making a computation—I am very hopeful that 150 more ex-Service men will be settled upon the land before the Martinmas term, which is 11th November of this year, and the work is going on in that particular just as rapidly as circumstances admit. You cannot wave a wand and produce a small holding. It requires a great deal of thought, trouble and time, I regret to say. All I can say is that the Board is doing everything in its power to cope with the demand, which the Report states to be urgent and to be large, and anything that can be done to meet it will be done in the future, and is being done now.

Major W. MURRAY: Could the right hon. Gentleman say what is the size of the holdings on which these men are settled?

Sir J. HOPE: And would he say since when these holders have been settled?

8.0 P.M.

Mr. MUNRO: These are figures going back to the date of the Act. So far as the size of the holdings is concerned, they vary. I cannot give a mathematical definition of the size of the holdings. May I just add that measures have been taken to train ex-Service men in agriculture? I think the House will agree with me that you could not do anything more cruel than to place a man upon a small holding who has no experience of the particular type of work; and, accordingly, there are schemes for training disabled and discharged men in four different quarters in Scotland proceeding at this moment, namely, at Ross (Tainfield Farm), Aberdeen (Craibstone Farm), Stirling (Cornton Vale Market Garden Colony), and East Lothian (Longniddry Centre). In connection with these schemes, the Board make Grants for capital expenditure and arranges for expert instruction. These are limited to disabled and discharged men in receipt of training allowances. The Board are making similar arrangements for fit ex-Service men who desire to be 'trained in the same way. Schemes are also in operation for officers. Scholarships tenable at an approved university or agricultural college in Scotland are made available to them. There are 260 candidates, and the Treasury, as I was able to intimate at Question Time to-day, has now sanctioned an expenditure of £18,000 more than the £6,000 at present available for the purpose. Training allowances have also been made to men who desire to remain on the farm of an experienced farmer selected toy the Board in order that they may get the training that is available to them there. Application has been made by 147, and out of these 100 are in receipt of training allowances to-day. Others desire to train so that they may take up farms in the Colonies, and instruction is being given at the North of Scotland College of Agriculture, where scholarships also, I hope, will be open to such men.
May I deal with one or two other points in the Debate? The question of Lewis was raised by several hon. Members. I agree with two things my hon. Friend behind me said about Lewis. The attachment of the Lewis man, he said, to the land is unique. I agree. The other was that his service in the War has also been unique. Again I agree. He said—and I again agree—that
it was to be hoped that Lewis men would receive exceptional consideration in respect of these two outstanding facts. I am not going to enter into controversy now as to Lord Leverhulme and the hon. Member who represents the Western Isles. If I were to do so, I should occupy a great deal more time than is at my disposal. All I can say is that it is my desire, if possible, to work in harmony with Lord Leverhulme in his scheme in Lewis—and all my efforts, and, I think I may add, all his efforts, have been directed by way of consultation and otherwise to endeavour to reach a common denominator in the matter. He has come to see me repeatedly. I have discussed the matter with him and with him along with my hon. Friend opposite. I am not without hope that we shall reach some common basis, because we both, I think may say, sincerely desire one thing, namely, the benefit of the Lewis people. I am very unwilling to add anything to-day which would tend to exacerbate feeling in the island. I am very anxious that no word of mine should be used for or against Lord Leverhulme, but that I should leave the matter at the point where it is in the Report, namely, that by conferences, I hope, some solution of what undoubtedly are difficulties to-day may eventually be found. That is the only reply that can be made at this particular moment. I trust the expression of hope which I have used may be found not to be over-sanguine.
There is also the question of Inverailort. There again the story is a long one. But I think I can tell the House in a few sentences how the matter stands to-day. There has been some little friction in the case which has perhaps been unavoidable. But I think all the parties concerned, the Board on the one side, and Mrs. Cameron Head, the proprietor of the estate, on the other, both desired the same thing, namely, that the food supply of the country should be increased at a critical moment. Mrs. Cameron Head believed that that could be best accomplished in one way, by leaving the deer forests as they were; the Board thought that that could best be accomplished—or rather, I should say, the tenant on the home farm thought it could best be accomplished—by stocking the deer forest with sheep and cattle. He thought that some substantial increase of food supplies would thus be secured. The Board took a middle course. They decided to leave one deer forest to Mrs. Cameron Head, and
she arranged to stock it herself. The Board, under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, entered into possession of, I think, about 1,842 acres, which was only a small proportion of the total acreage of 13,500. The Board let this place, Anstack, to Mr. McDonald, and he stocked it with 500 or 600 sheep and 50 cattle. The result of the Board's action under the Defence of the Realm Regulations so far as Anstack is concerned, at this stage, is not ascertainable, and that for more than one reason. In the first place, Mr. McDonald's lease does not terminate until 1920, and the result of his work, I think, could only be judged of as a whole. In the second place, such a return to which my hon. Friend has referred, up to the 31st July, has not been received by the Board. Until that return is received I do not think it is possible to form any opinion of value as to the success or otherwise of the Anstack scheme.

Sir GEORGE YOUNGER: What about the Report of 1918, for which I asked?

Mr. MUNRO: I am sorry I have not got the figure here. There is still another reason why I venture to put it to my hon. Friend that a discussion on this particular case at this particular moment is extremely inopportune. Mrs. Cameron Head has put forward a claim against the Board for £3,320 as compensation for loss sustained by her in consequence of the Board's occupation of her property under the Defence of the Realm Regulations for the past two years. That claim will probably be disposed of by way of arbitration, and I think that any discussion, either on the merits of the Board proposals or the results of the scheme, is really to be deprecated until Mrs. Cameron Head's claim for compensation has been disposed of by the arbitrator.

Sir G. YOUNGER: Will the hon. and learned Gentleman be kind enough to say what this claim has to do with the success or otherwise of stocking the farm in question? I do not know what the claim for compensation is, but it has nothing to do as to whether or not stocking the farm has been a success or a failure. At the present time it is covered with dead sheep which are not even being picked up.

Mr. MUNRO: In reply to the hon. Baronet, I should have thought that the amount of compensation was very closely connected with the scheme, and as to whether it was a success or not.

Sir G. YOUNGER: I thought that the compensation would be for damage to the forest.

Mr. MUNRO: I agree; but I am giving the hon. Baronet the information with which I am supplied. I cannot profess to have personal knowledge of a matter of that kind. I am advised by no mean authority that dealing with these matters now might prejudice either or both parties who are to take part in the subsequent arbitration.

Sir G. YOUNGER: If that be so, then I will not press my question.

Mr. MUNRO: That is the advice I have received. Two other matters have been dealt with, the one the Royal Commission on Agriculture and the other the Land Bank. As regards the Royal Commission it is impossible to satisfy everybody in regard to the constitution and personnel of a Commission of that kind. All I can say from personal knowledge is that the appointment of Scottish representatives has been approved in certain well-accredited quarters. There may be other views, and probably in point of fact there are, but as far as my information goes an attempt has been made to meet the views of those who are chiefly concerned in the matter, and to a large extent I think that has been accomplished. In regard to the services of the Land Bank I have no hesitation in saying—and I know a good deal about the work of that particular bank—I hope its future will be as successful as its past. I have dealt with a very large number of points as briefly and as comprehensively as possible, and I hope now, or at an early period, we shall be allowed to get this Vote of the Board of Agriculture, because I know certain hon. Members desire to discuss two or three other Votes on the Paper,

Captain W. BENN: I was very sorry indeed, in the right lion. Gentleman's lucid, detailed, and painstaking reply to-day, in the very striking reference to the right hon. Gentleman's attempt to set up small holdings in Scotland and to build houses, to note the keenness in getting material which at present the Board of Trade is restricting the import of. That is a point worthy of note. It only shows how the clumsy policy of the Board of Trade—if it can be called a policy—is interfering in that reconstruction which we all desire to see. To-morrow we arc going to discuss a Forestry Bill. It would be out of order to
deal with that Bill now, but it does propose in Clause 3 to transfer, so far as it relates to forestry, certain matters or powers at present in the hands of the Board of Agriculture to a new Commission. Certain people are in doubt whether this is a wise measure or not. I notice my right hon. Friend in making his speech referred to a Committee to be set up dealing with deer forests and cognate matters, and also another Committee dealing with nurseries for forestry. I desire to ask whether he or any other Member representing the Government of Scotland can explain to us exactly how that matter stands, what powers have been exercised by the Board of Agriculture, how they have been exercised during the past year; and to give us some guidance so that to-morrow, when the other Bill comes forward, we may be in a better position to judge whether it is wise that these powers should be transferred from the Scottish Department to the new Commission to be set up in England.

Mr. R. M'LAREN: I have no intention of proceeding into the region of agriculture, but I wish to bring before the House a matter of afforestation. If the hon. and gallant Member for Leith had read the Report which is out, I rather think he would not have put his question to the Minister for Scotland. Let me say at the outset the Report of the Board is a very admirable Report and reflects great credit on all concerned. While I say that there are two things which I wish to criticise, though I have not time to-night to do so; but, in connection with forestry, we find that the Board has been making some inquiries, and there in an Interim Forestry Committee taking evidence. It was my privilege as a member of the deputation to see the Minister, and the question was raised as to the best class of wood or timber to be set up in Scotland. We found that experiments are being made with two classes of timber for Scotland, namely, Scotch fir and larch. We gathered it was the intention to use these for pit-props and pit timber. I wish to say to the Board of Agriculture to-night they had better be wise before they begin to use Scotch fir in connection with such timbering. It is of no value whatever in connection with mining operations. It is quite true that for short prop and face work it may be all right; very often there are no difficulties. But, in con-
nection with the timbering and the support of roadways, I can assure the Board of Agriculture that Scottish mine owners and managers will not on any condition whatever use it if they can get any other timber. During the War, when there was no timber from abroad, the Scottish mine-owners and managers were compelled to use this timber, but it was only because they had nothing else. The reason why they did not use this timber is this: Suppose a couple of men put in two supports in the road with the intention of standing for a long time, they find it costs about 30s. On account of the weight above it the timber gives way, and it has to be replaced at a cost of anther 30s. It is not so much the cost of the timber but the cost of the labour that will make managers very chary about using this kind of timber at all. I suggest earnestly that great care should be exercised in selecting Scotch fir if the idea is to utilise that timber for pit-props, because it will be a great mistake and a dead loss to the country. Experiments should be made to find a better timber available for collieries, and then there would be more colliery people ready to avail themselves of it and use it.
In connection with the agricultural question, the Board have done something which can scarcely be criticised in a kindly spirit. They took lands from certain people in order to get more land ploughed up to produce more foodstuffs, which was in itself a good thing. One ease came to my notice recently in which I think the people were very unfairly dealt with. In connection with a golf club, the members of which were mostly working men, the ground was taken from them and the compensation was given over to the landlord, although these men have had to pay a very large sum of money. I think the Board of Agriculture might have looked at this case from a more reasonable point of view, and if they could not have given all the money to the golf club they should have given them a part of it instead of giving it all to the landlord. I suggest to the Board of Agriculture that in a case of that kind they might consider that those men have spent a considerable amount of money in getting up their clubs and sometimes they are not able to fulfil all their obligations, and through some error of judgment they get no compensation for the ground which is taken from them.
There are certain men engaged in connection with agricultural operations under
the Board that we require some further explanation about. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman what the inspectors do? Do they inspect the buildings or the plant or the land to see what kind of crops can be put in, or do they make inspections in connection with any other matter? I cannot see what need there is for these men to inspect so much, and it is much better that these people should be left alone on the farms to look after their own business. It is not pleasant to these people for an inspector to go about inspecting places when very often they are the wrong men in the wrong place, and the round peg in the square hole, and they do not know their business. With regard to the question of putting men on to the land there is a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst many soldiers who have returned from the War, and they think the Government are doing nothing to help them. I should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Board of Agriculture would try and do something very quickly in order that these men who have done a great deal for us may be satisfied. I am glad that the men who are anxious to go on the land are going to have an opportunity. I trust this matter will have the serious consideration of the Board of Agriculture, and that the men who really desire to take up agriculture will have no hesitation in going in for it, but I think they should have sufficient training before they do so.

Major MACKENZIE WOOD: I desire to take this, which is the first opportunity, of raising the question of the sales of estates throughout the country to what I may call, not inappropriately, land speculators. This is the question of the greatest importance which is creating great interest, particularly in my own Constituency of Central Aberdeenshire. The procedure is the same all over the country. It is that of a syndicate which acquires an estate, and they go to the farmers or smallholders and inform them, sometimes quite bluntly, that if they do not buy their farms they will be sold, and that they are likely to be turned out of their holdings on which they have been for many years. It is obvious that farmers are placed at a very serious disadvantage in this matter because they have to buy their farms now, and they have to pay the increased prices due to the inflation resulting from the War. All over the country we have the same experience, but it is particularly acute in my own Constituency, because there are 37,000 acres of land which have recently changed
hands, and the result of the sales of those farms is that many farmers and smallholders in that constituency are likely to lose their farms, and in some cases these farms have been in the family they are in now for many generations. This question has been raised on several occasions, and I have put several questions to the Secretary for Scotland on the point, and we have been told over and over again that the Government realise the gravity of the situation and are considering it very seriously. I should like to know whether the Government are now in a position to give us some information as to their policy on this most important matter. It is a question which is peculiar to all parts of the country. It is all over the country, and, as far as I can gather, it is likely to increase as time goes on. The question is urgent and demands an answer from the Government at the earliest possible moment.
Then there is the question of the small holdings, which is of great interest to the North-East of Scotland, as it is to other parts. I shall not go into that question now beyond expressing my disappointment that the question of land settlement and the extension of small holdings has made so little progress recently. I have a case which has been brought to my notice. It is not a question of settlement, because the man is settled on the land. It is the case of a man who is likely to be turned out after having been settled. I put it to the Secretary for Scotland or his representative because I thought that would be the quickest way of raising the general question I desire to put before the House. Here is the case of a soldier who went to the War, was wounded, disharged unfit, and was placed on a holding by the Board of Agriculture. My information was obtained, not from the man himself, whose statement might be considered ex-parte, but from a man whose only interest is in discharged soldiers. Two years ago he received a holding of ten acres with an out-run from the Government in Glenarchy, Dalmally, Argyllshire. As far as I can gather, he has made the greatest possible success of it, and, of course, he desires to be allowed to remain, as he expected he would be. He applied to the Board to build a dwelling-house on the land, and he offered to improve the fence and to erect additional fences, all at his own expense, in return for some security of tenure. The Board, while appealing
to him to increase his production for 1919, pointed out that his land was taken as a temporary measure in the interests of food production, and they could not give him any hope of the holding he had improved, but they asked if he was prepared to accept another holding elsewhere if the Board happened to be in a position to offer him one. That is the position of a man who has made a huge success of his holding. He has received notice to quit from the Board of Agriculture. Surely it would be a most painful experience to see the Board evict a man of this kind, particularly as he has made such a great success of his holding, and that, as far as I can gather, there are round about him about forty acres used practically entirely for the private sport of deer-shooting? That is a concrete case which I put to the Government, because I want to know why such a man, who has been put into his holding and has been there for two years should suddenly, after having done so well, be given orders to turn out? Would he have been told to go so readily if he had not made such a success of his holding and if the land had not been so very much more valuable as a result of his labour?
Everyone admits that the question of agricultural education has been neglected in the past and great efforts are being made on. all hands to give it more attention in the future. I have here a copy of an advertisement of the North of Soot-land College of Agriculture inviting applications for the position of assistant lecturer in agriculture at a salary of £100 per annum with a war bonus of 23s. per week. This is an offer made to a man who probably has gone through a course of three or four years at the university and who has a practical knowledge of agriculture. It is an offer which is less than the wage of an average farm labourer, and I should like to know whether the Board of Agriculture approves of such remuneration, and if they really think that any good education can come out of such starvation wages. It is hopeless to expect that we shall get any good from a policy of that kind. If it is a question of the Government's stinting money, I am sure that there are many other directions in which they could economise without making it necessary to ask an agricultural lecturer to devote his time to their service for £100 per year.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir J. HOPE: I think we have been rather handicapped by the departure of the Secretary for Scotland from the usual practice of making a statement at the beginning of the Debate, but there are one or two points which I would like to ask him. He said that there had been 628 new holdings created, I think since the 1911 Act. I should like to know how many new holders have been actually put on the land since the beginning of 1918. It is very difficult to find that out. He also gave the figures of the acreage of small holdings. He said that 154,000 acres in all have been secured by the Board of Agriculture, of which 18,000 are arable. I presume those figures also date back from 1911. If that is so, and assuming that no more than 18,000 acres are available for being turned into arable land, the proportion of arable land to the total of 154,000 acres available is very small. We all know the great difficulties which the Board of Agriculture have been under in endeavouring to obtain small holdings, but we should like to know a little more definitely how many small holdings have been created since 1918, and what are the immediate prospects of getting more smallholders placed on the land. I know that there are difficulties and that the subject is still further complicated by the fact that in all probability the question of small holdings will be dealt with shortly under the Land Settlement Act for Scotland, which we have not yet seen. Altogether we are rather in the dark.
It is very difficult to follow the financial part of it. No statement has been, made In the past, I think, there used to be a statement of the amount devoted by the Board of Agriculture to small holdings. The Secretary for Scotland reminded us that in the years of the War only £10,000 have been granted for the provision of small holdings under Section 5 of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911. This year we are going back to a Grant of £185,000, which was the sum voted in the pre-war year. One would like to know how that fund stands. It is expressly laid down in the Vote that this sum of £185,000 will be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, but the balance is not liable to surrender to the Exchequer at the close of the financial year. Therefore, one would like to know the exact state of the fund. How much is there standing to the credit of the fund from past years, and do the Board really think that this sum of £185,000 which they are getting now in addition to any amount which they have standing to their credit will be sufficient to
create the small holdings? The statement of the Secretary for Scotland with regard to the future creation of small holdings did not tell us very much beyond what we could find out from the Report and the Vote. I know that the right lion. Gentleman is most anxious to increase the number of small holdings and to promote the settlement of soldiers on the land as soon as possible, but I think it is most important to make it clear to Scotland that the Government intend not only to introduce Bills in fulfilment of their promises but to get some actual settlement of soldiers on the land in the near future.
The only other point I would like to refer to is this. The Secretary for Scotland divided his speech into two parts; first dealing with small holdings and then with agriculture. I want to take the general question, especially with regard to the appointment of the Royal Commission. The right hon. Gentleman admitted that some complaint had been made as to the composition of the Commission so far as the representation of Scotland is concerned. He truly observed, "You cannot satisfy everyone." But if there is any doubt as to the satisfactory composition of the Commission surely it is all the more important that its proceedings should be public and that it should not sit in secret. It is not, of course, within the power of the right hon. Gentleman to say whether or not its sittings shall be public, but inasmuch as there has already appeared a difference of opinion among members of the Commission as to the terms of reference and their proper definition, I hope that under the circumstances the right hon. Gentleman will use his influence to secure that the meetings are open to the public. Agriculture in Scotland as well as in England requires some certainty for the future. It requires some guarantee as to prospects in the immediate future. But there can be no such certainty until the Commission has reported. We were all delighted with the very sympathetic speech and promises of the Prime Minister with regard to the future of agriculture, but still we are anxious to get the Report of this Royal Commission. Only to-day I asked a question as to whether or not hay is to be controlled in the coming year. I could not get an answer on that point, yet at this moment hay is being sold at all sorts of fancy prices, ranging from £15 to £20, and farmers and consumers alike are anxious to know whether or not it is going to be controlled. They really want
to get rid of the present uncertainty, which tends very greatly to the detriment of agriculture and at the same time induces profiteering and speculation. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will have something to say on both these points.

Colonel GREIG: I want to call attention to the question of the equipment of small holdings, and to point out the difficulties which the Board of Agriculture has experienced in dealing with this matter. One of the chief difficulties has, of course, been that of labour, but there are also difficulties inherent to the defects in the Act of 1911. Everybody who remembers the passing of that Act knows very well what those difficulties are, and we should like the assistance of the hon. and gallant Member who last spoke and of his friends in amending the law and putting it on a better footing. What is mainly desired is the simplification of procedure and the grant of wider powers to the Board. Therein may be found our main difficulty. The hon. and gallant Member asked for more details of the expenditure. I am not in a position to go fully into figures, but it is rather significant that one of the items in the accounts is the sum of £25,931, shown as miscellaneous expenditure in connection with land settlement, and of this £21,500 was paid by way of compensation to landowners and tenants, in addition to about £1,400 expenses in connection with arbitration. There lies the whole thing in a nutshell.

Sir J. HOPE: What I wanted to know was what was the outstanding balance available?

Colonel GREIG: I have not the accounts, but probably it is a very small balance. A good deal has been said on the question of afforestry. It is alleged that the Board of Agriculture in Scotland has done very little in that direction. But that may be attributable to the fact that their energies previously to the War were directed, with the consent of Scottish Members generally, to the provision of small holdings. During the War the Board have been doing a good deal in the direction of afforestry. They have secured a survey of the whole country, and by means of their expert assistants they have done a great deal, although here again they have been hampered by the fact that so many of those experts have been serving abroad. But when one looks at the
Report of the Afforestry Department of the Board of Agriculture, one is bound to admit that they have an extraordinarily good record in this direction. I think it will be admitted by those who have read the Reports that that particular Department of the Board has done its duty as far as it has Been in its power.

Mr. MONRO: By leave of the House, I may be permitted, perhaps, to reply to one or two of the direct questions asked me since I sat down a little time ago. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) asked me questions with regard to forestry. He referred to the Forestry Bill. I do not propose to follow him in that process, and I shall say nothing about that Bill on this occasion, because I apprehend I should not be in order. He asked me a question about what has been done in regard to forestry. If I did not refer to forestry when I addressed the House before, it was because no allusion had been made to it in any of the speeches to which I was replying. Perhaps I may say in a sentence or two what the position is. During the War, Mr. Sutherland, who had hitherto been in charge of the forestry operations, was in France, and in his absence forestry was looked after by another member of the Board, Sir Robert Greig. The Board co-operated with the Interim Forestry Authority set up by she Government from the time that that authority was set up and conferred with them from time to time in regard to forestry questions. Mr. Sutherland returned in February of this year and resumed his duties as forestry member of the Board. Several forestry schemes either are going on or are in contemplation—first, at Borgie, to which the hon. and gallant Gentleman referred, where a nursery was stocked with 750,000 seeds last spring, and where planting operations, I hope, will be commenced in the autumn. There is also Craigmyle, to which reference was made in a former Debate in this House, where I hope it may be possible to begin planting in the autumn also. As regards the training of men who desire to become efficient in forestry, disabled soldiers have been placed upon a number of private estates for six months' training of a preliminary character. That scheme, which has been in operation for some time, has been continued during 1918, and all suitable applicants for work of this kind have been dis-
posed of in that way. After a preliminary training, the majority of these men pass on to the School of Practical Forestry at Birnam, where they take the normal course of two years. A small number of them have secured other positions in nurseries outside. That school is doing exceedingly well. There are to be. I believe, twenty-four students there in October. Other schemes of the same kind are now in contemplation. As regards forest nurseries, as the Report shows, the area has been considerably extended. I am told that no less than 4,250 lbs. of coniferous seed has been sown during the last season. My hon. and gallant Friend will see that, so far as forestry is concerned, the Board has been able, notwithstanding obvious handicaps in war-time, to perform a large amount of useful work.

Captain W. BENN: Will it be transferred to the new Commission?

Mr. MUNRO: During my hon. and gallant Friend's absence I had said I did not propose to refer to the Forestry Bill on this occasion, as I apprehended it would not be in order to do so. An hon. Friend behind me referred to two or three topics with which I shall deal in a word or two. He first spoke about timber. What he said shall be very carefully considered, because I know his familiarity with, that topic and his experience well justify the observations he made. He spoke also of the case of a golf course where compensation had not been paid. It was a working man's golf course which had been taken during the period of the War, I suppose for food-production purposes. I have made such inquiry as I could at short notice into that matter, and I find that the golf club, unfortunately, had given up its lease some time before it was taken over for food-production purposes. Accordingly it has no legal claim against the Board, and the Board was, therefore, unable to do anything for it. Whether the golf club was badly treated or not I do not know, but I can say it was not badly treated by the Board, who had no power to act otherwise than they did in the particular circumstances. My hon. Friend referred to inspectors, and seemed to suggest there were too many of them employed by the Board. I would have assured him, had he been present, that the inspectors he referred to have very onerous duties indeed to perform, not merely that of inspecting small holdings, which he seemed to think
was the only duty devolved upon these inspectors. They have very onerous duties in connection with the Diseases and Pests Acts, live-stock schemes and other schemes of a like nature. I can assure my hon. Friend that the lot of an inspector of the Board to-day is by no means an enviable one.

Captain BENN: Is there any reduction either in staff or in Grants in view of any possible lapse of duties through transfer to any other authority?

Mr. MUNRO: So far as I am aware, the answer to that question is in the negative. My hon. and gallant Friend opposite (Major Mackenzie Wood) raised several questions of interest in his speech. He spoke about the sale of land to speculators. He wrote me upon that topic quite recently, and I gave him a very full reply, which, I observed, was published in the Press. I have no complaint with regard to that. I was unaware that the reply was to be published, but I have not the slightest objection to the publication. All I say to my hon. and gallant Friend to-night is that I have nothing to add to the reply I then gave to him.

Dr. MURRAY: We did not all read it.

Mr. MUNRO: That was not my fault. If I thought I was entitled to delay the House by reading my reply again, I would do so, but I do not think there is any strong desire for it.

Major WOOD: Is there any policy for the future?

Mr. MUNRO: I do not quite appreciate what my hon. and gallant Friend means by policy in the future in this regard. What sort of policy does he suggest? Does he suggests a policy of suppression of these sales, or of legislation—

Major WOOD: I mean security of tenure.

Mr. MUNRO: That is the very point with which my letter dealt. I pointed out to my hon. and gallant Friend that there was security of tenure which could not be disturbed in the ease of land sales. If my hon. and gallant Friend is dissatisfied with the reply and chooses to write me again, I will send him another letter, which he can publish if he chooses, but I thought I had satisfied him at that time so far as policy is concerned.

Major WOOD: In an answer which he gave in the House to me some time ago, the right hon. Gentleman said that the Government realised the gravity of the case and were considering what to do in the matter. Have they now considered what to do, and have they decided to do anything?

Mr. MUNRO: That is not a question which I can be asked to answer offhand, as to what the policy of the Government is in regard to this matter. It is being considered. If my hon. and gallant Friend puts down a subsequent question, I will endeavour to give him a suitable reply. He went on to deal with a case where, he said, a very industrious smallholder had been turned out of his holding by the Board of Agriculture. I find it very difficult to deal with isolated cases of this kind, not even a name or a place being mentioned. All I can say is that I will look into the case in question. It would servo some purpose if my hon. and gallant Friend would send me a letter. I shall have the fullest inquiry made into the cases and write him regarding it. I should imagine from what he said that it may be a case where the Board had powders under the Defence of the Realm Regulations to take certain lands for the purposes of allotments for two years and that their powers either have now expired or are on the point of expiring. With the best will in the world to a smallholder, they have no power to keep him on that particular land. I do not know, but I apprehend that it may be the type of case.

Major WOOD: I think it is that type of case.

Mr. MUNRO: Then what is the grievance? If anything can be done, if my hon. and gallant Friend can suggest anything that can be done, let him send me a letter and I will see whether it is possible to get this man, with whom I have the fullest sympathy, a holding elsewhere. My hon. Friend also referred to an assistant lectureship at Aberdeen which was advertised at a salary of £100 per annum with war bonus. I do not know the circumstances sufficiently to say, but I apprehend that the lecturer advertised for was one who has just emerged from his student's course, an assistant junior lecturer, and that he is to begin at that not very lucrative salary which, however, according to my information, is not an unusual salary in the circumstances. At any
rate, for that salary the governors of the college are responsible and not the Board of Agriculture, and without knowing much more than I know about the circumstances I cannot express any further opinion upon that matter.
The hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir J. Hope) asked how many smallholders had been settled since the beginning of 1918. War conditions have made it extremely difficult to carry through any settlement on the land in England as well as in Scotland. The answer to the hon. and gallant Gentleman's question is "very few," but I cannot give a particular figure. He referred to the 156,000 acres I quoted, and asked whether that acreage has been acquired since the Act of 1911 or was acquired more recently. The position of matters is this: The 156,000 acres consist of 113,168 which were gifted to or purchased by the Board recently, and 40,849 were acquired under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act since the outbreak of war. So with regard to a large proportion of the acreage it was acquired quite recently, and with regard to 41,000 these were acquired since the outbreak of war. Then the hon. and gallant Gentleman referred to the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund, and wanted to know whether there had been a balance carried forward to the present year's account. There was, I understand, a certain balance carried forward, but it has long ago been expended on the purchase of land. He asked if I thought the funds sufficient. I do not. But Scotland is to receive, under the Lands Settlement Bill, a proportion of the money given to England, and Scotland's share will be £2,500,000 or thereby.

Question put, and agreed to.

PUBLIC EDUCATION, SCOTLAND.

Second Resolution read a second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution.

9.0 P.M.

Sir H. CRAIK: This Vote has come forward at a juncture which is all-important, looking to the legislative achievements of my right hon. Friend last Session. But it is impossible that we should pass it entirely without any reference to questions which are so interesting to Scotland in regard to education. The Act of last year marked a great crisis in the history of Scottish education. It opened to Scotland a totally different position, both as regards the Department and as regards
the local authorities, on whom an enormous responsibility will rest. But the right hon. Gentleman, although Grants are now to be given on a much easier and more general basis, must not consider that the influence of the Department is any less or its responsibility for the educational progress of Scotland at all diminished. These larger authorities have, in one respect, at the very outset been a disappointment to some of us. We expected that the larger authorities would attract greater interest in Scotland, that there would be a great gathering at the polls, and that the Scottish people, interested as they used to be in education, would gather in great numbers to elect those who were to have larger powers in regard to educational administration. We were seriously disappointed. The section of the voters who went to the poll ranged between 12 and 33 or 34 per cent. This did not show the great interest that Scotland has been accustomed to give to her educational affairs, and that very fact makes it all the more necessary for the right hon. Gentleman, as administrator of the Education Department, to give clear guidance in some of the difficult points that come before these large local education authorities.
There is, to my mind, another point that is a little disappointing. These large bodies, as was only too likely, have to some extent shown a tendency to turn into debating societies for the discussion of socialistic and other political problems, although they have in the administration of what is the most important thing for Scotland—education—an abundant work for their hands to occupy all their time and attention. I hope the right hon. Gentleman, having placed in their hands great powers of providing largely new opportunities for education, will encourage them to develop these as far as possible, and to use all means of attraction to bring pupils into the schools, but will not press them too hard with that fetish that we worship a little too strongly in the educational world—the fetish of compulsion. The older I grow and the longer my experience of education, the more strongly heretical I become as to the advantages of compulsion in education. I took part in the shaping of the legislation of 1870 and 1872, and if those who promoted those measures had known how disappointing the results
of nearly fifty years of compulsory education would be, I doubt if they would ever have put their hand to the plough. I am perfectly certain Mr. W. E. Forster, who introduced it first, felt that he introduced compulsion not as the ultimate be-all and end-all of educational administration, but as something which, if it were to succeed, would make itself unnecessary in time. I am sorry to say that I do not find that that is the result. It has rather diminished the ardour of parents, and it has not increased their zeal for the education of their children. Human nature somehow or other kicks against what is compulsory, even if it desired the thing before.
I would like my right hon. Friend to urge another point upon the attention of these new and enlarged education bodies, and that is the necessity that rests upon them, if they wish really to improve education, of being generous in the matter of teachers' salaries. It is not in buildings, in elaborate equipment, or in any of those costly provisions for variegated systems of education that you find your greatest success. The secret of success in our schools—and I trust my right hon. Friend will press this point upon the enlarged educational authorities—is to bring into the schools men of character, energy, sympathy, and power, who will make the schools not only well-built palaces where the children are shut up for a certain time, but really live focusses of intelligence, earnestness, and energy for the growing generation. Let him also remind these larger bodies that it is not in the muliplication of subjects that their success will rest, but in the simplicity and thoroughness of their educational curriculum. We are to-day forgetting that simplicity in education which is the greatest secret of success, and we are piling up long curriculi, adding subject after subject, instead of giving a simple and a most thorough education. I have looked at the educational reports issued under the right hon. Gentleman's Department, and they point to dangers in the educational world, dangers that we should have foreseen, dangers arising from the War, the dangers of interrupted education, and, above all, the danger of that indiscipline which may be troublesome to the rest of the world, which may be a disaster to the rest of the world, but which is most of all likely to be a disaster to the pupils themselves who come under its influence. The inspectors acting under the right hon. Gentleman have recognised the danger of
this lack of discipline, and though I think they are right, I do not feel too much of a pessimist in this matter. I feel that the lack of discipline which has grown up in the War is in itself an element of energy, strength, and force if it is rightly guided. These growing boys have seen much that has stirred their imagination, their energies, and their ambition, and they have got out of hand School teachers, school inspectors, parents, and police tell the same story, but do not let us be down-hearted. I believe that in their energy, and in the stirring of their ambitions, you have, if successfully and wisely guided and treated, a great prospect of success. But that can only be done if it is guided by sympathy and the intelligence of a high-class teaching staff.
A scale of salaries has been often spoken of as associated with my name, because I was chairman of the Committee which devised the scheme. I want to say to the right hon. Gentleman and to these great education authorities who have to deal with education hereafter in Scotland that that scale was not a maximum but a minimum, and, though I believe they will be utterly blamable if they fall below that scale. I should be very sorry if they felt themselves in any way bound by that scale. Two years have passed since we accepted that scheme, "which I was able to send in as a unanimous scheme, although the Committee was variously formed. These two years have added greatly to the cost of living. What was an adequate salary then has become a deficient salary to-day. I have had a new experience. I have sat on another Committee which dealt with the salaries of the police, and as I subscribed to paragraph after paragraph of that Committee's Report, I felt a guilty conscience saying to me, "What will the teachers say to this? How do the salaries which you are proposing for the police force compare with the salaries which will unfortunately attach to your name in a certain scale?" I am perfectly certain that we were right in the salaries we gave to the police. We were convinced, after a long, anxious and careful inquiry, that nothing less would serve; but I am bound to say, looking back and comparing my work of this year with my work of two years ago, that if I had to do over again the work which I did in 1917 I would make the scale of salaries attaching to my name rather larger.
There is another point to which I would like to draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention, and that is in. regard to a real grievance which Scotland suffers in her educational administration. It will be surprising to Scottish Members—if it is not surprising I hope it will rouse their indignation—that the museum appointments in Scotland are paid on an entirely different scale from those in England for exactly the same work. I asked several questions about this, and brought it before the notice of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. who answered very summarily. He said that the scale of salaries for these appointments had always been different in England from Scotland. I would ask my fellow Members from Scotland whether they are prepared to accept a statement that a wrong has been done to Scotland in the past as a reason for continuing it for all time? I trust they will give me their support in pressing what is a very fair claim. There are certain offices in the museum administration in Scotland which must be held by skilled scientists. The director and the keepers must be men, if they are to do the work, of the same qualifications as the men who hold similar positions in England, with the same grasp of scientific knowledge, with the same credentials, and with the same university and general academic position They must be men recognised equally for scientific work. If they are not men of high class, if they are third- or fourth-class men, then the situation will not have the position which it ought to have. I would ask my right hon. Friend is he prepared to press upon the Treasury, and if need be insist, that they should grant this very fair demand that these keepers who have to do precisely the same kind of work as keepers in England should be paid, not as they are paid now on a scale that brings the highest maximum to the minimum of similar officers in England, but that they should be paid on the same scale? I am quite ready to say that at the head of some of the larger English museums there must be a man whose responsibilities are so great that he should have a special salary, but I do not think that a director of museums is adequately paid if he is paid only on the ordinary scale that a keeper in England would receive. I know that my colleagues from Scotland will support me in this very fair claim. I believe that we have the sympathy of my right hon.
Friend, and I trust that he will use all his powers of persuasion, and even more than persuasion, upon the obdurate officials of the Treasury, with the knowledge that he has at his back the very strong and cordial support of the Members of Scotland.

Mr. D. COWAN: I cannot begin without expressing very keen appreciation of the words which we have just heard from the right hon. Gentleman (Sir H. Craik), who speaks with an experience and authority that are unrivalled in this House. Like the right hon. Gentleman, I will in the first place bear testimony to the service already rendered to Scottish education by the Secretary for Scotland and the great Department for which he is answerable in this House. The Act of 1918 did mark an era in the history of education in Scotland. What that era is to be will depend upon the interpretation put upon that Act. The Act has great capacities but still has to be made good in fulfilment. There is no greater mistake than to think that the Act, good as it is, has solved the education problem in Scotland. What it has done is to put into the hands of the people of Scotland the power of solving those problems for themselves. The right hon. Gentleman has expressed keen disappointment with the result of the polling in connection with the new authorities. I am inclined to take a rather more optimistic view than he. One of the reasons why polling in Scotland is so low in matters of education is that the people of Scotland as a whole are very largely satisfied with the system of education which they have at the present time. That is at least a more comforting doctrine than that of the right hon. Gentleman.
Look at one or two of the Scottish education questions in the light of the measure which was passed last year. First with regard to higher education. The Act was intended to bring within the reach of every child in Scotland very much greater educational opportunities than have been enjoyed in the past. It is not sufficient that we should simply put into an Act the possibility of making such an offer to the children of the country, but we must see that the offer is made a reality and that advantage is taken of it. Never at any time in the history of this country was better and more education required than at present. We have within the last year or two doubled our franchise.
If we are to have an educated and intelligent electorate we must have the best possible schooling that can be given. Further, we are anxious at present to secure and have gone some way towards securing shorter hours and better conditions of life for bur people, and we mean to go on securing these things more and more as opportunity offers, but this country cannot afford to give those shorter hours or those better conditions of life to its people unless that people is qualified by higher skill and higher education to do the higher-class work of the world. Only in this way can we keep our people ahead of those nations who work longer hours and live under less comfortable conditions. It will require the wisest efforts of the Department if the new authorities are to do all that we expect in carrying out the intentions of the Act with regard to higher education and the necessity for a very large personal provision. There is no use in giving small allowances to boys and girls going away from home to attend school. In such cases the danger of leaving home and living in unsatisfactory surroundings far outweighs the possibilities of benefit from a higher education. This is a very real matter. The expense of educating children in these days is one of the most heavy items in family expenditure. I am sure that this House appreciates keenly the sympathy which the Chancellor of the Exchequer exhibited in this matter with regard to the Income Tax a week or two ago. That will at least go some way towards giving the necessary relief in the matter of higher education of families. We have in the records of our country many proud achievements of boys who have risen from absolute obscurity to positions of eminence, but behind that there is a prouder record still, a record of self-sacrifice on the part of parents, and I do hope that the Department working through the new authorities will do its best to make smooth the path of those parents, and that while not relieving them of self-sacrifice it can at least make the path as easy and smooth for the children as possible.
There is one other question with regard to education in Scotland which we cannot leave wholly to the new authorities—I refer to the size of classes. That is a matter which must be dealt with nationally. We often hear of equality of opportunity in our educational system. It does not require much courage to say that there is no such thing as equality of
opportunity in education or anything else. Nature and our social conditions prevent anything in the way of equality of opportunity as among the masses of the people. We cannot do away with that inequality, but we can at least lessen it; and as regards the school portion of it, it can be lessened by reducing the classes to something like dimensions which can be dealt with adequately by an individual teacher. How can there possibly be a thing called equality of opportunity if on the one side you have a wealthy class able to give to the individual child one or more teachers or governesses, and on the other side children of the people crowded together in sixties, sometimes not under highly qualified teachers, because those teachers are poorly paid? I trust that at no distant date the Scottish Education Department will make it compulsory that, to start with, no class shall number more than forty, and ultimately perhaps thirty or twenty. There is another way in which educational opportunity may to some extent be made equal, and that is by the provision in our public schools of the very best class of teacher. I am not going to follow what has been said with regard to the remuneration of teachers. I had the honour of being on the Committee to which reference was made, and I can assure my right hon. Friend that the scales of remuneration recommended, modest as they appeared in our eyes then and still more modest as he regards them now, have loomed too large in the eyes of those older authorities to enable them to take advantage of them. If there is one disquieting feature in Scottish education now it is this, that the supply of teachers is going steadily down, while the need for them is going steadily up. If this Act is to be made anything like operative, we require thousands of additional teachers, and those thousands are not coming in. Not only are thousands of additional teachers required, but they must be teachers qualified on an ever-ascending scale if we are to keep our children in the schools up to the age of eighteen. Therefore, I hope that every encouragement will be given to the authorities to use a wise and generous discretion in the matter. Unless we get these teachers we fail in everything else. I would like to express my appreciation of what the Secretary for Scotland and his advisers have already done, and to add the hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not faint because this thing will cost money,
but that he and they will so frame their policy that the education of Scotland will be carried on in future with ever-growing success.

Major GLYN: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland whether he can give us some assurance as to the amount of the minimum national scales decided on by the Board of Education. It is absolutely essential that at this period we should attract, as teachers the very best of the people in Scotland, it has been very veil said that in peace time the first line of defence is a proper and genuine education system. With the competition that is now going on for women to enter various trades and callings, where salaries are high, it is nothing less than a scandal that we should have a village schoolmistress earning a pittance that would not be looked at for a moment by any woman worker in an ordinary trade union. In Scotland, in particular, we owe a great debt to the dominies. I certainly learnt more under the schoolmaster in the village school in Scotland than I ever learned at an English public school, and I do feel that it is wrong for us to stand aside and not to support in every way that we can the claims of the teaching profession in Scotland, not only for adequate salary, but, now that a Superannuation Act has been passed, to ensure that the scales upon which the pensions shall be based shall also be adequate. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able this evening to give us some assurance as to the national minimum scale both of pay and of pensions.

Mr. J. JOHNSTONE: I am sure the Secretary for Scotland must share the view of many Scottish Members that the time given to the discussion of these Estimates is utterly inadequate. We have been at it since six o'clock. We have dealt with agriculture. Now we are on education. We want a whole day for education alone. At ten o'clock the rest of the Scottish Estimates are to be closured.

An HON. MEMBER: There is the Vote for Fisheries.

Mr. JOHNSTONE: There will not be much chance for fisheries once we have dealt with education. I do not quite share the views of the right hon. Gentleman the representative for the Scottish Universities, that there ought not to be compulsion
in education. I wonder what the condition of Scotland would have been to-day without it! I rather think that we would have deep cause of regret that the powers of compulsion were not in operation. In Scotland there is an intense love for education among the people, especially in the country districts. Much of the Scottish character, all that is noble and grand and peculiar in the Scottish character, is just due to that intense love of education among the common Scottish people. I use the expression "the common Scottish people" in the good sense, meaning the ordinary country folk. An hon. Friend has made reference to the sacrifices that our people in Scotland have made in the interests of education. Workmen and work-women have stinted themselves in order that their children might receive that opportunity for education that their own poverty handicapped them from obtaining. But I must say this with regard to the new education authorities. I am intensely sorry that the Secretary for Scotland in his first impulse, when he introduced the first of the two Bills, did not adhere to his original intention in making the county councils and town councils the education authority. The new local education authorities, in my opinion, have been very disappointing. We were led to believe that this would present a grand opportunity for educational enthusiasm. In that respect we have been woefully disappointed. So far as my experience goes the men who formed the county secondary education committee have wholly disappeared from this new education authority, and quite inexperienced men have come up. There is little wonder, when one considers these facts, that there is a lack of local interest and such a small poll. I know one county in particular where some of the parishes have not a single representative on the new education authority. In Scotland every parish had its school board ever since the Act of 1872 came into operation, and there was an intense interest taken in the election of school boards, but when these new authorities came into being the old school board districts and many of our parishes had not the slightest chance of electing a representative on the new authority, because the larger boroughs swamped the villages. In many cases the majority of the members on the new education authority are representative of the boroughs, and the country parishes have lost any representation they had. There is little wonder that when the
polling day came the country parishes realised that there was not much use in going to the poll when instead of as before they had seven members of the school board only one man put up and he had not the ghost of a chance against the combination of boroughs and large parishes. So these new education authorities have been more or less a failure in enlisting the local interest that has always been manifested in school board elections in Scotland. I am not going to say anything as to the operations of the new authorities. It is too early to judge them. I believe they will take to the work and will do the best they can to promote education, and the fact of dealing with a larger unit will give them an enormous advantage, and I trust that education will make great strides forward. It is a matter to me of intense regret that at this time in educational affairs there has been such a sudden divorce between local interest and the education authorities. With regard to the question of salaries, if we are going to attract the best men and women to the teaching profession, and we must do so, then we must take a great step in advance in the way of salaries, and make the profession so attractive that it will be worth while for men and women of the very best class to come forward to the profession. When we consider the influence the teacher has, not, only in imparting education, but in moulding character, we must see to it that the conditions are such that they will be attracted to this great profession, the best men and women of the land. There is no subject more fruitful for the good of Scotland than this question of education, and I am sorry that time has not permitted us to discuss the subject at proper length. I hope it will be possible to give effect in the future to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Montrose to have these Estimates put before the Scottish Standing Joint Committee.

Captain BENN: There are two questions which I desire to put to the Secretary for Scotland. One is in reference to the teachers of the reformatory and industrial schools. I understand that similar teachers in England enjoy the benefits of the School Teachers Superannuation Act of1918, but, if I am correctly informed, teachers in Scotland in reformatories and industrial schools do not enjoy the benefits of the Education (Scotland) Superannuation Act of this year. That seems on the face of it to be an injustice, and I have never heard any satisfactory explanation on the point,
and I will be glad if the right hon. Gentleman will say something about it. The other matter is the question of a national school of training for sea service. This, is a matter which excites a great deal of interest in the ports in Scotland. The War has clearly shown how much we depend upon the efficient service of our Mercantile Marine, and this very day we have been celebrating the services rendered by the Mercantile Marine in the War. As the right hon. Gentleman is probably aware, schemes have been put forward for a system of national training, and a standardised system of training boys with a recognised scale of wages and some means of securing continuity of employment, and generally a comprehensive programme for securing to the service of the Islands for ever a good class of men for the Mercantile Marine. I understand there is a Committee sitting dealing with this matter of which one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Scottish Education Department is a member. I should like the right hon. Gentleman to assure us that the interests of the ports are being sufficiently represented, and perhaps he will also tell us, if he can, something of the progress of the work of that Committee and what hope there is of some such programme as that to which I have referred being carried out, and in the carrying out of that programme what part would be played by the nautical authorities and dock commissioners.

Mr. MUNRO: With regard to the point of a national scheme for sea service, as my hon. and gallant Friend knows, a Committee is at present sitting, and indeed, as I understand, is now engaged in drawing up a scheme on that matter. I hope their Report will be presented without undue delay, and I think, pending presentation of that Report, it will be premature for me to express any views about the various questions which my hon. and gallant Friend dealt with. I have no doubt at all that the ports will be duly protected in accordance with the Regulations of that Committee. He has also asked me about the superannuation of teachers in reformatory schools. This is a rather troublesome question. Teachers who are duly qualified in reformatory schools, as in any other school, come under the superannuation scheme for teachers. But I understand there are certain officers employed in reformatory schools who have no proper educational qualifications, and who cannot be held according to the ordinary use of language
to come under a superannuation scheme for teachers. We are awaiting some further information which has been promised by the Home Office, which is interested in this matter from the English point of view, and directly the information regarding that class of person is forthcoming the whole subject will be carefully reconsidered. We had some other very interesting speeches, particularly, if I may mention them, from the Members who represent Scottish universities. The first speech which was delivered in the Debate on education struck me as being very impressive, coming as it did from an hon. Member who has unrivalled authority and experience with regard to the subject which he discussed. He said that the election of the new authorities in Scotland had been rather disappointing in respect of the sparse number of electors who went to the poll. It is quite true that the percentage was not high, but it was, I think, a little higher than he stated. The lowest percentage was 12.5, and in some cases it rose to 45.7, the average being 28.9. My hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew (Mr. J. John stone) said that the school board elections had aroused a great deal of interest. That is so, but I am told that the percentage was in many cases not higher than it was on this occasion when the education authorities were elected It is quite true that those authorities were elected when the public mind was distracted with other matters and interested in other affairs. I think it is certainly premature to say, as my hon. Friend said, that those education authorities are a failure. Surely it is far too soon to judge them when they were only elected in the month of April last. I think that, although the number of voters who went to the poll may not have been very great, the personnel of these new authorities is, speaking generally, excellent, and that, so far as one can see, they have taken a wide outlook and shown a sense of responsibility which is exactly what one would expect to find from authorities elected on the basis on which they have been elected.
My right hon. Friend and several other hon. Members spoke about the importance of teachers' salaries. I am in entire agreement with that view, and I think one of the most urgent problems which comes before these new education authorities is just that problem of salaries. My right hon. Friend has done invaluable work on
the Committee which will be always associated with his name, and which recommended salaries which have in many cases been adopted by the education authorities already. The minimum national scales to which the Act refers have not yet been laid down, but, with a view to their preparation, the Department has already had a number of meetings with representatives, not only of the teachers, but of the education authorities in Edinburgh, and I understand that further conferences are to take place this week. I am not without hope that an agreement which will be acceptable to all concerned may shortly be arrived at. In the meantime many authorities have adopted the Craik scale of salaries either with or without modification. I quite recognise that the suggestions were made at the time when conditions were different from what they are to-day, but I think that has been borne in mind by the education authorities who have dealt with the matter. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Stirling and Clackmannan raised the same point about the minimum national scale, and the answer I have given to my right hon. Friend applies to the question he put also. I hope that without delay these scales may be adjusted. At the present moment conferences are proceeding with a view to their adjustment. My right hon. Friend also pressed upon me the position of museum servants. I can assure him that their position has not been forgotten by the Department, and at the present moment communications are passing between the Treasury and the Scottish Education Department on that particular matter. I am in entire sympathy with what my right hon. Friend said, and any appropriate pressure that I can bring to bear upon the Treasury to accede to this, as I think, most reasonable request, will certainly be exercised. One of my hon. Friends spoke about the small salaries at present being paid to teachers. In many cases I agree they are not so large as one would like that they should be, but some improvement at Feast has been effected. My hon. Friend will remember that in a recent Grant £60,000 were set apart for the benefit of the lower-paid teachers, and as a result of that Grant the average salaries of teachers have been raised from £112 in 1916 to £134 to-day. I do not say that that is the ideal, but still an improvement has been effected, and I hope that that may still continue. My hon. Friend who represents the Universities spoke about the size
of classes. That is a vital question, and the Department bears it in mind. I do not know that I can give any definite undertaking with regard to it, but we are quite alive to the individual attention which is necessary in order to secure an effective educational training. I have endeavoured very rapidly and very briefly to cover the points which have been raised in this short and useful Debate, and I hope, now that these points have been raised and dealt with, we may be allowed to get the Vote.

Mr. J. BROWN: I think it quite right that Scottish Labour should be identified with this Vote. We Labour men want education. I think most of the Members sitting on the benches hardly realise the intensity of the feeling of Labour men on behalf of a higher and better education for all the community, and we certainly will be the last to starve education, and what we desire is that education should be lifted on to a higher plane altogether, and that it should attract the very best kind of teachers to the schools, that we should give them some opportunity, and that we should make the path easy for every boy and girl from whatever home to go from the elementary school to the university. Not that we are minding about the great geniuses. In the old days the schoolmaster, of the school that I attended at any rate, took special pains with certain individuals, thereby sending out one or two lads of parts, but we want the whole standard of education raised, so that every child in the land will have a proper opportunity to be educated if he is able to take that education. We desire that the teaching profession in Scotland should not be lagging behind their professional brothers elsewhere. My confidence was almost shaken, at least it was badly assailed, during the last two or three months regarding how we are lagging behind, and I think everyone of us ought to try to get the very best terms for our teachers as to salaries, as to pensions, and as to size of classes, so that when they enter the schools they may have a chance of sending forth the very best material for the consumer. I do not propose to invest money in a better way than by giving it to education. It will come back to you a thousand fold; it will come back to you in the wiser counsels from the people; it will come back to you in a thousand ways that nobody dreams of now, and I trust that every precaution will
be taken to see that education in Scotland will not suffer, but that due remuneration will be given and that everything will be done to foster it.

Question put, and agreed to.

FISHERY BOARD, SCOTLAND.

Third Resolution read a second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed.
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution.

Mr. A. M. SAMUEL: I must apologise to the Scottish Members for intervening in this Debate on a purely Scottish subject, but I would like to make the personal explanation that I was born and bred near Great Yarmouth, which is the largest herring port in England, if not in the world, and I take a deal of interest in the herring question. The vote which appears on the Paper seems to call for some comment—I mean the grant of £1,131,000 for pickled herrings before the l5th September, 1919, and that the sum will cover purchases in England and Wales as well as in Scotland. I do not propose to make any objection to that Grant, because the money will be returned, I expect, by the sale of these herrings on the Continent, but I think the policy which has led up to the Grant of that money is wrong, and it ought not to be repeated. The amount of herrings which that will cover, 400,000 barrels, I put down at 300,000,000 herrings—600 a barrel. That is about one-tenth of the total export of herrings before the War to Continental ports. They went for the most part to Germany and to Russia. Now it seems to me that a small amount of herrings like that could very well, if there had been any energy, I will not say in the Fishery Board for Scotland or England, but in the curers themselves, have found a market in various inland towns in this country. When I think that there is likely to be a great shortage of meat, and that we cat no more than 1½ ozs. per head per week of all sorts of fish in this country, and .3 lbs. per head of meat, of which 1½ lb. is imported, and we have to pay for it, I think on economic grounds, let alone on the grounds of enterprise, something ought to have been done to put even another ounce and a half of fish per individual in this country into the hands of the consumer. I do not propose to sing the praises of the herring, but I would remind the house that, weight for weight, the herring gives as much sustenance to a man as fat beef, and I think
some steps ought to have been taken, on propagandist lines, to inform the people of this country that they have a cheaper form of food awaiting them than beef. I remember an occasion in the port of Yarmouth, about ten years ago, when we had 100,000,000 herrings one day, and 80 per cent. were sent to Germany and Russia, at prices ranging from 3s. per 1,000 to 12s. per 1,000. That meant that you could buy 12lbs. of herrings for 1d. An hon. Member asked a question as to whether there should be imported tinned herrings into this country, or whether restriction should be put upon the importation. I am not controverting that question in any way, but it shows that the Germans were before the War up to the old Hansa tricks, so that herrings which were sold for 12 lbs. a Id. were coming back to us at six for 2s. Before we repeat the process of granting money for pickled herrings to go to Continental ports, some steps should betaken with the railway companies to deliver herrings into the smaller inland towns, and provide refrigerators and freezing plants at the ports.
Above all, there is one other thing which I trust the House will not think I am facetious about. We have lost the art of cooking herrings. I took the trouble to get together a list—and it is at the disposal of the Secretary for Scotland if he likes to have it—of a large number of ways of cooking herrings in this country about 150 years ago. When reference is made to what Lord Leverhulme is doing, I am not going to discuss whether he is right or wrong about Canning or agriculture, but I am very glad that he is going to take up the question of the fisheries, because he may tell us how to put up herrings either in oil or vinegar, in bottles, or with herbs or vegetables, so as to give us a fresh form of food which we can have at a cheap rate, and give an impetus to the herring fishery, which will languish a great deal if we lose our market on the Continent. Out of 3,500,000,000 herrings caught the year before the War in this country, 3,000,000,000 went to Germany and Russia, and at the ridiculous price of about three or four a penny. I see no reason why we should not get a form of curing herring very much like that used for the salmon in North America There is bound to be a glut from time to time, and the Secretary for Scotland will tell us you must have
them salted, or the Germans will not otherwise take them. I do not believe the herrings are all used in a wilted form in Germany, many are de-salted, and then turned into delicatessen.

It being Ten of the Clock, MR. SPEAKER, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15, proceeded to put forthwith the Question necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution under consideration.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.

Mr. SPEAKER then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions, That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of each Class of the Civil Service Estimates, of the Navy Estimates, Excess 1917–18, and the Revenue Departments Estimates, and other outstanding Resolutions severally.

CIVIL SERVICES ESTIMATES AND SUPPLE-MBNTARY ESTIMATES, 1919–20.

Class I.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class I. of the Civil Service Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class II.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class II. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class III.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class III. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class IV.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class IV. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class V.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class V. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class VI.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding
Resolutions reported in respect of Class VI. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Class VII.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class VII. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF MUNITIONS (ORDNANCE FACTORIES).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Ministry of Munitions (Ordnance Factories)," put, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF PENSIONS.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Ministry of Pensions," put, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF NATIONAL SERVICE.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Ministry of National Service," put, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF RECONSTRUCTION.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Ministry of Reconstruction," put, and agreed to.

MINISTRY OF LABOUR (CIVIL DEMOBILISATION AND RESETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Ministry of Labour (Civil Demobilisation and Resettlement Department)," put, and agreed to.

BREAD SUBSIDY.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Bread Subsidy," put, and agreed to.

WAR TRADE DEPARTMENT.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the War Trade Department," put, and agreed to.

RESTRICTION OF ENEMY'S SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Restriction of Enemy's Supplies Department," put, and agreed to.

NATIONAL WAR SAVINGS COMMITTEE.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the National War Savings Committee," put, and agreed to.

TREASURY SECURITIES DEPOSIT SCHEME.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Treasury Securities Deposit Scheme." put, and agreed to.

IMPERIAL WAR GRAVES COMMISSION.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Imperial War Graves Commission," put, and agreed to.

CENTRAL CONTROL BOARD (LIQUOR TRAFFIC).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic)," put, and agreed to.

LOANS TO DOMINIONS AND ALLIES.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Loans to Dominions and Allies," put, and agreed to.

CANAL COMPENSATION.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Canal Compensation," put, and agreed to.

MILITARY SERVICE (CIVIL LIABILITIES) DEPARTMENT.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Military Service (Civil Liabilities) Department," put, and agreed to.

PROPERTY LOSSES (IRELAND) COMPENSATION.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Property Losses (Ireland) Compensation," put, and agreed to.

PURCHASE OF HOUSING MATERIALS (ENGLAND AND WALES).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Purchase of Housing Materials (England and Wales)." put, and agreed to.

PURCHASE OF HOUSING MATERIALS (SCOTLAND).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Purchase of Housing Materials (Scotland)," put, and agreed to.

ROYAL PATRIOTIC FUND.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Royal Patriotic Fund," put, and agreed to.

COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE DE RAVITAILLEMENT.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Commission Internationale de Ravitaillement," put, and agreed to.

MISCELLANEOUS WAR SERVICES (FOREIGN OFFICE).

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for Miscellaneous War Services (Foreign Office)," put, and agreed to.

COAL MINES DEFICIENCY.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Estimate for the Coal Mines Deficiency," put, and agreed to.

REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1919–20

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding
Resolutions reported in respect of the Revenue Departments Estimates," put, and agreed to.

NAVY ESTIMATES, EXCESS 1917–18.

Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Navy Estimates, Excess 1917–18," put, and agreed to.

Orders of the Day — WAY AND MEANS [31st July],

Resolutions reported,
That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1918, the sum of £10 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.
That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, the sum of £613,315,596 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.

Resolutions agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in, upon the said Resolutions, by the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Baldwin.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (NO. 2) BILL,—"to apply certain sums out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the years ending on the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, and one thousand nine hundred and twenty," presented accordingly, and road the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 166.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Orders of the Day — SCOTTISH ESTIMATES.

Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That this House do now adjourn."—[Colonel Sanders.]

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: May I draw the attention of the Joint Patronage Secretary (Lord E. Talbot) to what has-happened in connection with the business of the House this afternoon? The Scottish Estimates were put down. Very little notice was given, and many of the Scottish Members who were away in Scotland were unable to travel back in time for this Debate. Owing to the River Pageant
—with the objects of which we all naturally sympathise—the Debate on the Scottish Estimates was suspended for nearly a couple of hours, the result being that some of the later items had to be gabbled through—if I may use that expression. The Vote for the Fisheries Board was only just reached. I hope that every fisherman in Scotland, whether he be employed on a trawler, a steam drifter, a motor boat, or a sailing boat, or whether he be a salmon fisher, will take notice of the fact that owing to the procedure laid down by the Government, their vital interests, affected so deeply by these Votes, have to a large extent been left undiscussed in this House to-day. Speaking in the Debate the Secretary for Scotland said that on two Votes we had had very useful and, I think he said, very practical Debates. That may be so, but if be were to say that the Debate we have had this afternoon was all that Scotland either demanded or considered necessary I feel perfectly convinced that Scotland would rise as one man and tell the right hon. Gentleman that that did not at all satisfy their demands. The Debate we have had this afternoon has been a perfect farce. We have been able to discuss in very short detail some of the affairs that affect Scotland, but we have been quite unable to discuss at length, as we ought to be able to do, very vital interests that affect Scotland at the present time.

Sir HENRY COWAN: I should like to associate myself with the protest of the hon. and gallant Gentleman my colleague in the representation of Kincardine and Aberdeen. It amounts almost to a scandal that the Scottish Estimates should be taken on such a day as this. I wanted most to speak on the Scottish fisheries. I cannot do so on this Motion for the Adjournment. But I reflected, when I heard a Member on the other side of the House representing an inland English constituency discoursing to the House about herrings, that I should have to account to my Constituency for my time, representing, as I do, the two great Scottish herring fishery ports, Fraser burgh and Peter-burgh. There must be many Scottish
Members who desired to put forward the interests of their constituencies to-day, who have been deprived of the one opportunity in the year because those Scottish Estimates have been put down on a day which is practically a dies non.

Captain W. BENN: Touching this matter of the business of the House, may I ask the Noble Lord a question? We were informed at Question Time that that very important Bill, the Welsh Temporalities Bill, was to be taken on Wednesday. This Bill embodies a very big question about which many hon. Members feel strongly and about which a good deal of interest is taken in the country. I have inquired twice to-day at the Vote Office, and the Bill is not available. Does the Noble Lord really think it is treating the House of Commons with respect to print a Bill on Tuesday morning—a Bill of primary importance, and a Bill which was a subject of a special pledge in the manifesto of the Coalition Leaders—to print such a Bill on one morning and to propose to take the Second Reading on the next day?

Lord E. TALBOT (Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury): In answer to the last question of my hon. and gallant Friend, there is no desire unduly, or in a too great a hurry, to take the Welsh Church Bill. The only question is how long the House wishes to sit. It is a question of the general convenience of the House. If the House does not want to take the Bill, we are in the hands of the House. As to the question of the Scottish Estimates being put down for to-day, my hon. and gallant Friend is wrong in suggesting that there was not sufficient notice. The usual notice was given on Thursday last that this Vote would be taken to-day.

Lieut.-Colonel MURRAY: Surely the hon. Member will agree that in the case of the scottish Estimates longer notice—

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Gentleman has already spoken.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Fourteen minutes after Ten o'clock.